DOD-STD-2167A
| Status | Cancelled 1994 / Legacy |
|---|---|
| Year started | February 29, 1988 |
| Organization | United States Department of Defense |
| Base standards | Preceded by DOD-STD-2167 |
| Related standards |
DOD-STD-2168 Succeeded by |
DOD-STD-2167A (Department of Defense Standard 2167A), titled "Defense Systems Software Development", was a United States defense standard, published on February 29, 1988, which updated the less well known DOD-STD-2167 published 4 June 1985. This document established "uniform requirements for the software development that are applicable throughout the system life cycle." This revision was written to allow the contractor more flexibility and was a significant reorganization and reduction of the previous revision; e.g.., where the previous revision prescribed pages of design and coding standards, this revision only gave one page of general requirements for the contractor's coding standards; while DOD-STD-2167 listed 11 quality factors to be addressed for each software component in the SRS, DOD-STD-2167A only tasked the contractor to address relevant quality factors in the SRS. Like DOD-STD-2167, it was designed to be used with DOD-STD-2168, "Defense System Software Quality Program".
On December 5, 1994 it was superseded by MIL-STD-498, which merged DOD-STD-2167A, DOD-STD-7935A, and DOD-STD-2168 into a single document, and addressed some vendor criticisms.
One criticism of the standard was that it was biased toward the Waterfall Model. Although the document states "the contractor is responsible for selecting software development methods (for example, rapid prototyping)", it also required "formal reviews and audits" that seemed to lock the vendor into designing and documenting the system before any implementation began.
Another criticism was the focus on design documents, to the exclusion of Computer-Aided Software Engineering (CASE) tools being used in the industry. Vendors would often use the CASE tools to design the software, then write several standards-required documents to describe the CASE-formatted data. This created problems matching design documents to the actual product.
One result of these criticisms was to begin designing a successor standard, which became MIL-STD-498. Another result was a preference for formal industry-designed standards (such as IEEE 12207) and informal "best practice" specifications, rather than trying to determine the best processes and making them formal specifications.
...
Wikipedia