Without a good definition of software quality, you'll have a tough time achieving it, and if you don't _share_ your definition with someone, you'll have a hard time _convincing_ them that you _have_ achieved it!

This talk introduces ACRUMEN, my simple yet fairly comprehensive definition, that devs of any level can use, with any tech stack, for free. It stands for the idea that software should be Appropriate, Correct, Robust, Usable, Maintainable, and Efficient. (Come to the talk to see what the N stands for!) I will explain why we need a new definition, and how to apply this one, then explore each aspect in turn, including further nuances and immediately useful tips on how to _achieve_ each one.

You will come away better equipped to analyze the quality of anybody's software, give precise feedback on its shortcomings, teach the next generation of developers how to produce high-quality software, and most importantly, improve the quality of your own software.

This is aimed mainly at intermediates because they've realized how important, _yet fuzzy_, software quality is, while juniors usually haven't yet, and seniors have usually already developed their own approach to quality. However, juniors can generally understand the ideas _when pointed out_, and seniors can still benefit from a different point of view. Also, seniors may still be struggling to put their approach into words so as to teach it to any juniors and intermediates they oversee or mentor. Even non-techies will benefit from having a more precise vocabulary to tell us exactly _how_ our software falls short (to put it politely).

I've given this talk before at several conferences and Meetups, and am scheduled to do more soon, including keynoting Voxxed Days CERN. The latest video is at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5iJGC01ApSc (from Frontrunners DC 2023).

There is deliberately zero code in this, to emphasize that "code quality" is just a part of the overall picture of "software quality" that I am addressing -- and that the concepts are completely technology-agnostic (unlike some other definitions).

Agenda:
- Why do we need a new definition?
- What’s in this one?
- Basic FAQs: How do we use it, how can we quantify it, and is ACRUMEN always the right order?
- Explore nuances and tips for each aspect in turn
- Further FAQs if time allows, such as other good definitions I've found
- Conclusion
- Q&A

I would like to do this as an inspirational/motivational plenary keynote (and will do so at Voxxed Days CERN), but could also do it as a regular conference session.