Forget Agile development for database models, as it results in ad-hoc
changes to a relational model which should be generated from an abstract
model in the first place. 

This means that if you set up your relational model by generating it
from an ORM/NIAM model (http://www.orm.net) for example by using visio,
you can model it in there, make changes there, generate the changed
model and import the change script into the database. NIAM/ORM also
forces you to think through the model you want to set up, which is a
GOOD thing, despite the people who want you to believe otherwise. 

It's never been bad to make an abstract relational model of your
database model first, based on research. What you experience is one of
the big disadvantages of just making changes to what you're doing as you
go along. Some elements of the software development process are not that
suitable for this. One being the foundation of your BL: the database
model.

Fowler wrote an article about this once: however your experiences proof
that he's wrong, but perhaps he mentions something you can use:
http://martinfowler.com/articles/evodb.html

Again, please, do yourself and your team a big favor and use some good
old fashioned knowledge which has proven to be very useful in the last
30 years of software development: do research up front, use that
research to create dfd's, dsd's etc. and a NIAM/ORM model. Create your
tables etc. from that model and THEN start programming. Not very agile,
however very effective. After all, software development is done to
create something, not just to spend some time behind a keyboard :)

        Frans.

> Are there any Continous Integration shops on the list? How do 
> you handle database changes?
> 
> I am working toward having my team use continous integration 
> as part of our move to AGILE programming methodologies.
> 
> The one problem I can't seem to solve (i.e make everyone 
> happy) is changes to the database. Currently eveyone has 
> their own local db and distributes scripts via email and the 
> developers don't like this and want to all develop on a 
> "Central Database".
> 
> I had to change from this because I was having problems with 
> scripts being left out of SS and when it came time to build 
> to production It was a nightmare of scripts and diffs and 
> late nights and a very pissed off wife.
> 
> I am not afraid, except for the wife :) to make an SOP and 
> enforce it, I am just looking for the best solution.
> 
> Very soon the source build will be automated so I want to 
> solve the db part.
> 
> Any ideas or help will be appreciated
> 
> Gary Davidson
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> From must-see cities to the best beaches, plan a getaway with 
> the Spring Travel Guide! 
> http://special.msn.com/local/springtravel.armx
> 
> ===================================
> This list is hosted by DevelopMentor(r)  http://www.develop.com 
> Some .NET courses you may be interested in:
> 
> NEW! Guerrilla ASP.NET, 17 May 2004, in Los Angeles 
> http://www.develop.com/courses/gaspdotnetls
> 
> View archives and manage your subscription(s) at 
> http://discuss.develop.com
> 
> 
> 

===================================
This list is hosted by DevelopMentor�  http://www.develop.com
Some .NET courses you may be interested in:

NEW! Guerrilla ASP.NET, 17 May 2004, in Los Angeles
http://www.develop.com/courses/gaspdotnetls

View archives and manage your subscription(s) at http://discuss.develop.com

Reply via email to