Talk:ISO/IEC 12207

Initial

ISO/IEC 12207 – Information Technology – Software Life Cycle Process Published in 1995, this is an international standard that covers the software life cycle from inception till retirement. It contains a framework that for managing, controlling and improving software life cycle activities. The standard describes the major processes of software life cycle, how the processes interface with each other and a high-level relation that govern their interactions. For each process, the standard also describes the activities and tasks involved, defining specific responsibilities and identifying activities of the tasks. Since it is a high-level standard, it does not detail how to perform the tasks or activities. The 17 processes covered in this standard are grouped in three categories.

1) Primary Process a. Acquisition Process b. Supply Process c. Development Process d. Operation Process e. Maintenance Process

2) Supporting Process a. Documentation Process b. Configuration Process c. Quality Assurance Process d. Verification Process e. Validation Process f. Joint Review Process g. Audit Process h. Problem Resolution Process

3) Organization Process a. Management Process b. Infrastructure Process c. Improvement Process d. Training Process

Target Audience 1) Organizations acquiring system that contain software 2) Organizations that supply software products 3) Organizations involved in software operations or software maintenance —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 59.160.169.17 (talk • contribs) 17:55, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Merge

Looks like IEEE 12207 is the same. Luis F. Gonzalez 00:50, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

IEEE 12207 is essentially the IEEE's adoption of ISO/IEC 12207, with a bit more guidance on implementation. In the way most people view it, I think, ISO 12207 has evolved into IEEE 12207. Gordon Long 13:45, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

IEEE 12207 and ISO 12207 should definitely be merged – there is no reason for two separate articles. The two topics can be mentioned as sections within the same article, which I suggest is the international one. -- MightyWarrior 14:28, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Above comments are all out of date now that ISO/IEC 12207:2008 and IEEE 12207:2008 have been adopted, and are essentially the identical same standard. Per talk comment on the IEEE 12207 page: IEEE 12207 nee IEEE 12207.0 is outdated and superseded. IEEE 12207:2008 is the current standard and is the same as ISO 12207, which in that article actually refers to ISO/IEC 12207:2008. References: http://www.12207.com/12207-news.htm, http://www.acm.org/tsc/lifecycle.html, http://www.math.unipd.it/~tullio/IS-1/2009/Approfondimenti/ISO_12207-2008.pdf. ISO 12207 should be updated to fully reflect the 2008 merger of the two standards, and should incorporate (merge) the IEEE 12207 verbiage. The IEEE 12207 page should be removed, or be retitled 12207.0 and clearly reflect that it discusses an old, out of date document. 216.243.176.75 (talk) 18:02, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Disposal Phase

One does not normally think of a disposal phase when it come to software - it's not like it will fill up landfills or have other environmental impact. Yet software can have lasting value. Think of it as having the last word in a piece of history. It is not required, although prudent to capture source code and a description of functional capability of a system artifact. Take for example, the Apollo moon landings. Does the software still exist to allow mankind to re-create the conditions that helped land us on the moon? Despite advances in technology, it remains a hard problem. New business opportunities can still exist in old code.--96.244.247.130 (talk) 01:39, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Additional Resources

OpenSDLC, if linked appropriately, would provide considerably more detail to each of the existing sections. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.75.231.123 (talk) 15:27, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on ISO/IEC 12207. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20060624094543/http://sepo.spawar.navy.mil:80/12207.doc to http://sepo.spawar.navy.mil/12207.doc

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 14:11, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Clean up and merge

This article was in shambles. Upon review and research, it was missing much of the 2008 info and all of the 2017 info. Though the IEEE maintained its own standards (see section of this article about that), they fully became a stakeholder with the 2017 update. They still maintain an identical copy for IEEE members, but that aside, there was nothing really different about the ISO/IEC version. And it became "ISO/IEC/IEEE" in 2017. Also, per notes in this talk, the old IEEE 12207 article was ALSO outdated and probably deserved to be merged into this article years ago. That should be firmly solidified with the 2017 update. I included all the necessary IEEE info in this article and "merged" (though there was little of substance there to merge) it to here, turning it into a redirect. Hopefully this fixes all issues that were previously inherent in both articles. Lostraven (talk) 21:32, 22 June 2018 (UTC)