#quality ass

[crashpit]

hmm might answer the phone actually

[tariah23]

Oh…. Well, it’s over for Crunchyroll I guess

[eliast-94]

How Good is the quality of OSS

Understanding Software Quality

What makes great software? It’s not just fancy features or spotless code but it’s about creating tools that people love to use and that treat everyone fairly. In the fast-changing world of software development, the idea of “quality” means much more than just working code.

From a technical perspective, Amy Ko.jo, in Cooperative Software Development, highlights key traits like correctness, reliability, robustness, performance and portability. These are the building blocks for good software, helping it stay free of buts, handle unexpected problems and work across different devices. In this article, we’ll explore how these traits play a big role in testing and finding buts which are critical for building reliable systems.

But software isn’t just about machines or computers but it’s also about people using it. A major part of software quality is making sure it doesn’t unfairly harm or exclude anyone. For example, Amy J. Ko explains, biased data or algorithms can lead to discrimination like reinforcing harmful stereotypes. Fixing these biases is a key part of building software that regards everyone equally.

The Quality of Open-Source Software

Open-Source Software has sparked a lively debate about its quality. On one side, supporters say OSS creates better products because of the way it’s built which is by a global community of developers working together. As Oleh Romanyuk explains in FreeCodeCamp’s article on the Pros and Cons of OSS, open-source software is shaped by thousands of contributors each bringing unique skills and experience from different industries and technologies. This mix of perspectives makes it easier to spot and fix problems quickly, which means the software becomes more reliable and functional over time.

Data backs up this claim. The Coverity Scan Open-Source Report shows that OSS often has fewer bugs per thousands of lines of code compared to proprietary software. Why? Because open-source projects are constantly reviewed and improved by many developers creating a kind of “always-on” quality control system.

But the story doesn’t end there. A blog post by the World Bank, Quality of Open-Source Software: How many Eyes are Enough? points out that bigger proprietary software projects often beat OSS in quality. The reason you ask. Big companies have dedicated teams of paid experts and structured processes to find and fix complex problems. These teams don’t just fix the obvious, but they tackle the tough ones that require deep knowledge of the software’s inner workings.

This brings up a challenge for open-source software projects. They often lack the consistent funding and organized workflows that proprietary software teams have. As Amy K. Jo explains in Cooperative Software Development, software quality isn’t just about the code but also how the code is created. While OSS does a great job fixing simpler bugs through teamwork, the harder to spot issues may require the resources and expertise that only a well-funded proprietary team can provide.

So, is open-source software better? The answer isn’t so simple. OSS thrives on collaboration, bringing together diverse ideas and talents to create something great. But proprietary software benefits from structure, funding and expert teams. Maybe the real takeaway is this: quality depends not just on the software itself but also on the people and process behind it.

The Role of Quality Assurance in OSS.

Open source thrives on community collaboration - volunteers from around the world contributing their time, skills and insights to develop, debug and enhance software. However, because open source operates on a voluntary basis, challenges like varying levels of expertise, inconsistent time commitments and the “release early, release often” philosophy can make quality assurance difficult. For open source to maintain high-quality standards, developers, quality engineers and users must work together  to ensure the software remains reliable and functional.

Continuous integration tools like Jenkins are essential in this process. Projects like Pulp use Jenkins to automate testing, monitor results and catch integration failures early. This helps ensure only stable, well-tested code reaches the end users. Automated test frameworks such as Pulp Smash further strengthen quality by allowing contributors to write flexible, portable tests that identify regression swiftly.

Community Test Days also play a key role. Projects like Fedora organize test days, inviting users to propose areas for testing, document their findings, and collaborate in forums like IRC channels. These test days empower users to become active participants in quality assurance, ensuring critical issues are identified and addressed. Additionally, Bug Triage days, like Foreman’s Bug Day, give users the chance to prioritize and resolve existing bugs, reducing the backlog of unresolved issues.

Through tools like continuous integration, automated testing, community test days and but triage, open-source projects can ensure high quality and maintain stability even in the face of decentralized development.

Addressing Bias in Open-Source Software: Overlooked Quality in OSS?

Bias in OSS development specially when it comes to gender, continuous to be a significant issue. Women are underrepresented in OSS and they miss out on a valuable development and professional opportunities. As new jobs open up, many women lack the experience needed to apply which can only continue this cycle. According to researchers like Anita Sarma and Steinmacher,  these problem may be build into the very tools used for OSS development which creates barriers that discourage women from participating.

Their research focuses on tools like Eclipse, Git, GitHub, Jira and Hudson, tools that weren’t always designed with divers users in mind. Steinmacher explains, “If someone implements a tool without considering a diverse set of user, they may include such kinds of bugs which affect one gender more that the other.”  The team plans  to use GenderMag, a method developed by Margaret Burnett to identify gender-biased barriers in these tool.   

To truly improve the quality of OSS, addressing bias requires a deliberate effort from a diverse group of contributors who bring a variety of perspectives to the table. By prioritizing inclusivity in design and testing, OSS can create software that works for everyone not just a select few. Without this focus, bias can undermine the overall quality and fairness of OSS, reducing its effectiveness and limiting its impact. In the end, addressing bias is not just about fairness but also about improving the overall quality of OSS and ensuring it works for everyone.

References

Ajko, A. (n.d.). Cooperative software development: Quality. University of Washington. Retrieved from https://faculty.washington.edu/ajko/books/cooperative-software-development/quality

Gibbons, S. (2021, December 29). What is great about developing open source and what is not? FreeCodeCamp. Retrieved from https://www.freecodecamp.org/news/what-is-great-about-developing-open-source-and-what-is-not/

Black Duck Software. (n.d.). Coverity Scan: Open source. Retrieved from https://www.blackduck.com/

M. K. (2019, May 28). The quality of open source software: How many eyes are enough? World Bank Blogs. Retrieved from https://blogs.worldbank.org/en/opendata/quality-open-source-software-how-many-eyes-are-enough

How Good is the Quality of Open Source software compared to proprietary software © 2024 is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International 

[rozer0ry]

So, do i look like him ?

[emziess]

First Teaser for Percy Jackson and the Olympians Season 2

[honestlyitsjustsam]

favourite moments of bg3 -> (5/?)

[tvuniverse]

ARCANE Jinx and Vi -> hugs through the seasons

[the-jedi-ninja]

Inspired by this post

[bbrabbits]

another super insulting part of the watcher situation i haven't rly seen ppl addressing much

ryan deadass saying smth like "nobody else on youtube has made tv quality content"

like... i really feel like it's important to highlight that bc not only do they obviously have no respect for their audience, but that statement shows they have no respect for their peers in the industry, either.

not to mention it is a shining example of bleeding arrogance to such a high degree, you will straight up fucking lie bc you're truly convinced you're that special when you're anything but.

there's been NUMEROUS online creators who were recognized by entertainment industry workers BECAUSE they made tv quality content & even full stop blockbuster quality content.

bo burnham started on youtube & is now one of the most wellknown & loved standup comedians of our generation, with numerous netflix specials & even a movie he wrote & directed under his belt.

the try guys, fellow ex-buzzfeed employees, had their own tv specials on food network (based off their youtube shows, btw) & a documentary made about them as well

rosanna pansino has also been on numerous food network shows both as a host & a judge

quinta brunsun, another fellow ex-buzzfeed employee, went on to create her own whole ass sitcom that has been highly praised

matpat cameo'd in the fnaf movie because of his theories & multiple other fnaf creators had small cameos through the employee of the month board easter egg

markiplier made multiple high-quality shows on youtube & is now working on a highly anticipated movie (he was also planned to cameo in the fnaf movie but couldn't due to conflicting schedules with his own movie)

hot ones got their own tv gameshow due to their popularity & they are still one of the most wellknown, beloved & respected internet shows

many short films made on youtube went on to premiere at film festivals & even in theaters

the hit horror film "talk to me" was created by youtubers rackaracka

webseries of actual fucking tv shows have also existed for literal decades

the list goes on.

to seriously think that overproduced bullshit is all you need to make "tv quality content" is not only tone-deaf, but shows they do not even know what they're talking about. many tv shows & huge blockbuster movies are made with absolutely microscopic budgets & small teams, & they still get praised & awarded for the passion, dedication, & creativity that shined brightly under those restrictions.

the blair witch project is probably the most wellknown & highly praised example of this, but it is far from the Only example

it is a whole other slap in the face, again ESPECIALLY when puppet history is one of their most popular shows, to spit in the face of internet history. to see the success of their predecessors, even ppl they fucking worked with at buzzfeed, & deny them of all their success & efforts to get where they ended up.

no, y'all are not the first people to make "tv quality content" on the internet. FAR from it. because your crap isn't even genuine "tv quality".

but you are the first ones to ever disrespect not only your audience, but your own fucking industry & your peers on this level.

& you are the first & i sorely hope the only fuckwads dumb enough to pull a stunt this fucking stupid, out of touch & utterly tone deaf.

[biggest-gaudiest-patronuses]

real talk having the 2nd worst new years eve yet 🤢🤢🤢 (throat infection, twisted neck, banged-about-foot, ego AND the rest o' me all bruised like misjuggled peaches 🍑🍑🍑)

im bent outa shape and suspectin the universe owes me 8 buck if anyone wannsa chip in

[ikjun]

dear wonshua 🤍

[peskyvinot]

WL spoilers

thought i left my desert duo obsession days behind me but you know what. a heart wrenching "OH SCAR.." from grian will never fail to evoke some emotion in me

[louferrignojrofficial]

this moment has had me in a chokehold for hours

[taeminie]

Joong Archen and Dunk Natachai in Dare you to Death (2025-)

[skarsgards-bill]

Hayden Christensen welcomes NASCAR driver Bubba Wallace to the dark side

[emziess]

#shirtlessbuck 9-1-1, S01E01 vrs S08E05