On Software Development (or "O Sr. SiIva disse..."): EN

Mostrar mensagens com a etiqueta EN. Mostrar todas as mensagens

terça-feira, 3 de abril de 2018

DIGEST: SW Licensing options

An interesting sum-up of some licensing options (http://www.codeproject.com/info/Licenses.aspx) that might be of interest as a first approach to a decision on what license can we apply (or are we obliged to use) when reusing and/or building upon.

Quoting (licenses valid for Code Project):
"

Microsoft Reciprocal License

A Microsoft open license and a free software license . Allows for distribution of derived code so long as the modified source files are included and retain the Ms-RL.

The Code Project Open License (CPOL)

The main points subject to the terms of the License are:

Source Code and Executable Files can be used in commercial applications;
Source Code and Executable Files can be redistributed; and
Source Code can be modified to create derivative works.
No claim of suitability, guarantee, or any warranty whatsoever is provided. The software is provided "as-is".

The Common Development and Distribution License (CDDL)

Based on the Mozilla Public License (MPL) that makes it more applicable for use outside the Mozilla Foundation.

The Microsoft Public License (Ms-PL)

Used by Microsoft. Compiled derived code can be distributed, for both commercial and non-commercial use. If the source code is to be redistributed then a complete copy of this license must be included in the redistribution.

The Mozilla Public License 1.1 (MPL 1.1)

Used by Mozilla and Firefox, among others. The patent clauses are not acceptable to some.

The Common Public License Version 1.0 (CPL)

Derived from the IBM Public License and influenced by the Mozilla Public License, and used by some Microsoft projects on SourceForge.

The Eclipse Public License 1.0

A newer version of the Common Public License that is in some cases more acceptable to business.

The MIT License

A very old license with essentially no restrictions on the use of the code. It also provides very little in the way of protection for authors or users. It is the same as the BSD license without the 'no endorsement' clause.

The BSD License

A very old license with essentially no restrictions on the use of the code. It also provides very little in the way of protection for authors or users. It is the same as the MIT license except that it includes a clause preventing the use of the author's name for endorsement.

The Apache License, Version 2.0

Slightly more restrictive (but still very open) version of the BSD or MIT license that adds patent clauses. Read carefully.

The Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 2.5 License

A license that requires a link be visible on works that use this license. "Share alike" is what it sounds like, you can share this work as long as that work has a license similar to this one.

It is recommended that this license not be used for software.

The zlib/libpng License

A license with an emphasis on freedom of use and re-use, with a few restrictions.

A Public Domain dedication

Not a license, but a dedication to the public domain. All rights are given up and anyone can do anything they wish with the code. Please note this is not a license and provides no guarantees for the user and no indemnities for the author.

The Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License

This license lets others distribute, remix, tweak, and build upon your work, even commercially, as long as they credit you for the original creation. It is recommendedthat this license not be used for software.

The Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported License

A license that requires a link be visible on works that use this license. "Share alike" is what it sounds like; you can share this work as long as that work has a license similar to this one. It is recommended that this license not be used for software.

The Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 3.0 Unported

A license which specifies that if you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you may not distribute the modified material. It is recommended that this license not be used for software.

The GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPLv3)

A derivative of the GPL that was intended to allow non-GPL code to work with, and call GPL code. The author of this license asks that you only use this license if you are licensing functionality already commonly available.

Example usage in your code

(Replace 'Foobar' with the name of your product)

This file is part of Foobar.
 
Foobar is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify
it under the terms of the GNU Lesser Public License as published by
the Free Software Foundation, either version 3 of the License, or
(at your option) any later version.
 
Foobar is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
GNU Lesser Public License for more details.
 
You should have received a copy of the GNU Lesser Public License
along with Foobar.  If not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>.

The GNU General Public License (GPLv3)

A common but misunderstood license. This allows developers to freely use the software as long as they use the same (or an even less restrictive) license for parts of the program that they wrote themselves. Viral in nature. Read carefully and make sure you understand the implications of using this license. Unacceptable to many.

You can write commercial software using software licensed with the GPL, but you cannot write proprietary software (meaning software for which the code is not freely available). You can sell GPL code, even if it's already being given away, or you can sell services attached to the code such as support contracts.

Any software written using GPL'd code must itself be licensed using the GPL (or less restrictive license) meaning it cannot be proprietary. This means that developers writing commercial software may not be able to use GPL code if they do not wish to provide the code.

One important note (thanks to René Pfeiffer): The GPL doesn't require you to publish the source to the world. Only the recipient of the software needs to have the source. If you have a customer, write GPLed software for a specific purpose and only give the binary to this customer, then only this customer must have access to the source code, not everybody and not the public; just the recipient of the (binary) code. This is in full agreement to the GPL. The main advantage is to play with open cards and not create a "blackmail" situation.

At the Code Project we prefer that developers allow other developers to use their freely given code in whatever way they wish - commercial, proprietary, or free for anyone. Our preference is that our authors do not use a GPL-like license.

Example usage in your code

(Replace 'Foobar' with the name of your product)

This file is part of Foobar.
 
Foobar is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify
it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
the Free Software Foundation, either version 3 of the License, or
(at your option) any later version.
 
Foobar is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
GNU General Public License for more details.
 
You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
along with Foobar.  If not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>.

terça-feira, 13 de março de 2018

Metrics: Three metrics for measuring engineering speed (company / team velocity)

Three metrics for measuring engineering speed - SD Times

Quoting:
"Companies want to deliver high quality software fast, but how fast is fast enough? A recently released report by CircleCI found three important development metrics to predict an organization’s velocity and maturity.
The metrics are:

mainline branch stability,
deploy time and
deploy frequency.

“Most teams have no idea what speed actually means,” said Jim Rose, CEO of CircleCI. “They are deploying and they are doing it at a rate that feels good to them, but they don’t necessarily know where that stacks up compared to the rest of the market.”

The study looked at a sample of organizations built on the CircleCI’s cloud platform from June 1 to July 31, 2017."

quarta-feira, 21 de fevereiro de 2018

AI and Software development

The AI fever is coming to the SW Development world. I mean, not developing SW with AI features, but using AI to improve software development (quality and more) Outsystems (a low code platform provider is "catching the train"):
https://www.scientific-computing.com/news/outsystems-launches-centre-excellence-increase-ai-application-development

Quoting:
" new centre will initially focus on three big projects including developing AI assistants by providing best practice patterns, components, and widgets during application design, AI Assistants will make developers more efficient and become the new paradigm for pair programming.

The project will also focus on designing AI-based Analysers that will decrease application maintenance costs. By analysing the structure of complex apps before they are deployed AI-based Analysers will be able to predict issues and monitor real-time usage patterns to make recommendations on how to improve and refactor applications.

Finally they researchers also aim to develop AI-based systems that automatically generate new feature recommendations for new applications based on large data sets of usage, error reporting, customer feedback, adoption rates, and business metrics."

terça-feira, 26 de setembro de 2017

Teams: How to make friends... (BOOK, 1936)

The classical "How to Make Friends and Influence People" (Dale Carnegie, 1936). I use to say we don't have to be friends with the people you work with, but for sure if you get along your team (as a manager or as a team member) things for sure will go smoothly. And these techniques could help you with that hard manager (if you believe they are still up to date):
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Win_Friends_and_Influence_People

Quoting:
"In 1981, a new revised edition containing updated language and anecdotes was released.^[2] The revised edition reduced the number of sections from 6 to 4, eliminating sections on effective business letters and improving marital satisfaction.

In 2011, a 3rd edition was released, titled How to Win Friends and Influence People in the Digital Age. This edition was written by Dale Carnegie & Associates. It applies Carnegie's prescription for relationship and business success to the digital age.^[1]"

terça-feira, 29 de agosto de 2017

Collaboration: yes or no?

Well maybe yes. But in the right side and proportion. When possible use just ONE stop for it (that allows you to ignore notifications when needed):
https://www.economist.com/news/business/21688872-fashion-making-employees-collaborate-has-gone-too-far-collaboration-curse?fsrc =scn /fb/te/pe /ed/thecollaborationcurse

PS. (PT):
Ahhh, nada como ter um chat para mandar uns bitatos aos colegas do lado quando preciso de espairecer enquanto os outros tentam trabalhar. De que nos queixamos? É só o telemóvel, as SMS, o Skype, o Skype for business, o Yammer, o MS teams, o Slack, o Confluence, o FB messenger, o FB em si (que pode ser uma ferramenta de trabalho em certos contextos), o LinkedIn, o e-mail (que inclui as notificações do JIRA ou outro issue tracker que se esteja a usar), os RSS feeds que se subscrevam, o Snapchat e mais umas quantas outras coisas que nos podem provocar mudanças de contexto dezenas (centenas?) de vezes por dia.

Com impacto negativo na produtividade. Claro.

terça-feira, 25 de julho de 2017

The F-35 (software) saga

Talking about pressure to deliver? Read below:
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/07/25/f35_software_block_3f_complete_end_2017_says_lockheed/

Quoting:
"Meanwhile, the Pentagon's director of operational test and evaluation told a US Congress committee earlier this year that the aircraft won't be ready before 2019, mentioning 158 "Category 1" software flaws that could cause death, severe injury or illness unless fixed.

The USAF hit back at these reports, announcing in May that Block 3F would be ready by "September or October" this year. Block 4 is said to be already in development, in spite of the delays to Block 3F. New software "drops" will be rolled out about every two years, with Block 4 scheduled for the beginning of the 2020s."
(...)
"The paper also pegged the cost of each aircraft at around £198m, though post-publication commentary appeared to suggest that the newspaper had included the through-life costs of each aircraft (i.e. spare parts, software upgrades, fuel, etc). The majority of public cost estimates are done on an "upfront" basis and do not include projected spares packages and the like.

Delays and cost overruns have been a frequent feature of the F-35 saga. Given the sheer quantity of software in not only the aircraft but its ALIS logistics suite too, it should be no surprise that costs have spiralled and unforeseen delays reared their heads. After all, since when did any Big Government IT Project run on time and within budget?"

And more news on the F-35:

(Updated: 2017-07-31, link fixed, add. links)

quinta-feira, 14 de julho de 2016

BOOK: SBOK Guide - A Guide to the SCRUM BODY OF KNOWLEDGE

One interesting thorough book on Scrum, talking of Scrum of Scrums and many other interesting topics is the SBOK™ Guide (A Guide to the SCRUM BODY OF KNOWLEDGE).
The PDF links are:

www.scrumstudy.com/download-free-SBOK.asp (English version)
www.scrumstudy.com/download-free-SBOK.asp?lan=pt ("Portuguese" version)