Mr George "Quality" T.,

What if Mr Lutz meant that too much Quality Assurance can be detremental? We would remain within your interpretation of the word Quality, and still I think there is something to be said for this statement, the distinction being between the enunciation of an otherwise perfectly sound concept and the implementation by us mere mortals (no relation with the framework implied).

Have you seen the revolutions that (mostly smaller sized) companies have had to go through to get the often much desired 9xxxx standard and recognition? And as happens often the strictly theoretical objectives become remote and actual personal politicking takes over resulting in chaos. Some companies do not make it throught the quality assurance revolution.

Does not mean it is not a desirable thing, but it must not become an objective in itself. The analogy with OO, three tier, COM, etc and other modish word come to mind.

My 2 BEF,

Marc

PS:

Your mood being it what it is, I hope you can see that it takes a lot of courage to not agree with you these days. But the occasions are rare so I thought I'd let you know anyway :):).

Truly hope things will work out for you. But even in a bad mood you are an example of good manners.