Ken <tyl### [at] pacbellnet> wrote in message
news:3AD3071C.92FAEFAD@pacbell.net...
>
>
> "up.luino" wrote:
> >
> > A simple question :
> > POV 3.5 is OK or K.O?
> > Greetings to all.
> > Aldo.
>
> I can say, with almost certainty, that it will be released.
>
> --
> Ken Tyler

And the people rejoiced, all is well.

-Chris-

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 10 Apr 2001 16:30:18 +0100, Tom Melly wrote...
> "Jan Walzer" <jan### [at] lzernet> wrote in message
> news:3ad32621$1@news.povray.org...
> > you have 180% time for your projects ???
> 
> Never heard of project creep? (and I don't mean the stinky guy in the next
> cubicle).

Is this related to the saying that 'Putting twice as many programmers on 
a project that's late makes the project twice as late'?

Bye for now,
     Jamie.

Post a reply to this message

I love this. Its great, Tom. Thanks.

Tom Melly wrote:
> 
> "Ken" <tyl### [at] pacbellnet> wrote in message
> news:3AD3071C.92FAEFAD@pacbell.net...
> 
> > I can say, with almost certainty, that it will be released.
> >
> 
> They say ev'rything can be raytraced,
> Yet ev'ry error is not clear.
> So I remember ev'ry brace
> And ev'ry param which should be there.
> I see my light come shining
> From <500,10,0> unto the east.
> Any day now, any day now,
> It shall be released.
> 
> They say ev'ry O/S needs protection,
> They say ev'ry app must fall.
> Yet I swear I see my sphere's reflection
> Some place so high above this iso-wall.
> I see my light come shining
> From <500,10,0> unto the east.
> Any day now, any day now,
> It shall be released.
> 
> Posting to this newsgroup crowd,
> Is a developer who swears he's not to blame.
> All day long I hear him curse his code,
> Crying out about some damn page-frame.
> I see my light come shining
> From <500,10,0> unto the east.
> Any day now, any day now,
> It shall be released.
> 
> apols to http://www.bobdylan.com/songs/released.html

Post a reply to this message

Jan Walzer wrote in message <3ad32621$1@news.povray.org>...
>you have 180% time for your projects ???


At least!

--
Mark

Post a reply to this message

> Jan Walzer wrote in message <3ad32621$1@news.povray.org>...
> >you have 180% time for your projects ???

> At least!

and the rest !!


--
Rick

Kitty5 WebDesign - http://Kitty5.com
Hi-Impact database driven web site design & e-commerce
TEL : +44 (01625) 266358 - FAX : +44 (01625) 611913 - ICQ : 15776037
POV-Ray News & Resources - http://Povray.co.uk

PGP Public Key
http://pgpkeys.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x231E1CEA

Post a reply to this message

That's pretty cool Tom. So I'm guessing +Z points south for you eh?

[snip]

>From <500,10,0> unto the east.
>Any day now, any day now,
>It shall be released.
>

Post a reply to this message

In article <3ad32621$1@news.povray.org> , "Jan Walzer" <jan### [at] lzernet> 
wrote:

> you have 180% time for your projects ???

No, but you need 180% time.  Or closer to 250% of the planned time...


      Thorsten

Post a reply to this message

In article <MPG.153d5ce5737c09fa9898b7@news.povray.org> , 
jam### [at] ntlworldcom (Jamie Davison) wrote:

> Is this related to the saying that 'Putting twice as many programmers on
> a project that's late makes the project twice as late'?

Wasn't that the result of a famous IBM project that turned out to be a
perfect field study of a failing project?


      Thorsten

Post a reply to this message

Thorsten Froehlich wrote:
> 
> In article <MPG.153d5ce5737c09fa9898b7@news.povray.org> ,
> jam### [at] ntlworldcom (Jamie Davison) wrote:
> 
> > Is this related to the saying that 'Putting twice as many programmers on
> > a project that's late makes the project twice as late'?
> 
> Wasn't that the result of a famous IBM project that turned out to be a
> perfect field study of a failing project?
> 
>       Thorsten

From http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/jargon/html/entry/Brooks's-Law.html:

Brooks's Law prov. 

"Adding manpower to a late software project makes it later" -- a result
of the fact that the expected advantage from splitting development work
among N programmers is O(N) (that is, proportional to N), but the
complexity and communications cost associated with coordinating and then
merging their work is O(N^2) (that is, proportional to the square of N).
The quote is from Fred Brooks, a manager of IBM's OS/360 project and
author of "The Mythical Man-Month" (Addison-Wesley, 1975, ISBN
0-201-00650-2), an excellent early book on software engineering. The
myth in question has been most tersely expressed as "Programmer time is
fungible" and Brooks established conclusively that it is not. Hackers
have never forgotten his advice (though it's not the whole story; see
bazaar); too often, management still does. See also creationism,
second-system
effect, optimism."

Brooks has since migrated to graphics.  When he got the ACM Turing Award
(the closest thing CS has to a Nobel Prize), he chose to give his
acceptance speech at SIGGRAPH.

See also
http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/jargon/html/entry/Ninety-Ninety-Rule.html:

"The first 90% of the code accounts for the first 90% of the development
time. The remaining 10% of the code accounts for the other 90% of the
development time." Attributed to Tom Cargill of Bell Labs, and
popularized by Jon Bentley's September 1985 "Bumper-Sticker Computer
Science" column in "Communications of the ACM". It was there called the
"Rule of Credibility", a name which seems not to have stuck. Other
maxims in the same vein include the law attributed to the early British
computer scientist Douglas Hartree: "The time from now until the
completion of the project tends to become constant."

-Mark Gordon

Post a reply to this message

Thorsten Froehlich wrote:
> 
> In article <3ad32621$1@news.povray.org> , "Jan Walzer" <jan### [at] lzernet>
> wrote:
> 
> > you have 180% time for your projects ???
> 
> No, but you need 180% time.  Or closer to 250% of the planned time...
> 
>       Thorsten

From http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/jargon/html/entry/Brooks's-Law.html:

Brooks's Law prov. 

"Adding manpower to a late software project makes it later" -- a result
of the fact that the expected advantage from splitting development work
among N programmers is O(N) (that is, proportional to N), but the
complexity and communications cost associated with coordinating and then
merging their work is O(N^2) (that is, proportional to the square of N).
The quote is from Fred Brooks, a manager of IBM's OS/360 project and
author of "The Mythical Man-Month" (Addison-Wesley, 1975, ISBN
0-201-00650-2), an excellent early book on software engineering. The
myth in question has been most tersely expressed as "Programmer time is
fungible" and Brooks established conclusively that it is not. Hackers
have never forgotten his advice (though it's not the whole story; see
bazaar); too often, management still does. See also creationism,
second-system
effect, optimism."

(Brooks has since migrated to graphics.  When he got the ACM Turing
Award (the closest thing CS has to a Nobel Prize), he chose to give his
acceptance speech at SIGGRAPH.)

See also
http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/jargon/html/entry/Ninety-Ninety-Rule.html:

Ninety-Ninety Rule n. 

"The first 90% of the code accounts for the first 90% of the development
time. The remaining 10% of the code accounts for the other 90% of the
development time." Attributed to Tom Cargill of Bell Labs, and
popularized by Jon Bentley's September 1985 "Bumper-Sticker Computer
Science" column in "Communications of the ACM". It was there called the
"Rule of Credibility", a name which seems not to have stuck. Other
maxims in the same vein include the law attributed to the early British
computer scientist Douglas Hartree: "The time from now until the
completion of the project tends to become constant."

-Mark Gordon

Post a reply to this message