Hello all,
I don't know if there's an agenda yet for the February EPF F2F, so here are a few topic recommendations: * Redefining the architectural approach in OpenUP (https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=165258). We've been having some small-group discussions about this and it would be useful to report on progress so far. There are still issues to be resolved so this may be a good opportunity for a breakout. * Redefining the relationship between design and implementation (https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=168725). Brian and I have had a couple of informal discussions but there's still a lot to do in defining this. It may be useful to discuss the intent of this issue in the main meeting, and have a breakout to make further progress. It may also be useful to have a joint breakout with the architecture and design/implementation groups to discuss interlocked issues. * Simplify the explanation and description of use cases (https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=168275). The problem is that use cases require a learning curve that many developers, particularly in small teams, are not willing to dedicate themselves to. User stories try to address this issue, but they can be ambiguous, and they can define solutions rather than requirements. Can we come up with a simpler way of doing use cases, and what would be the cost of doing so? Should we move to user stories instead, or leave things as is? - Jim ____________________ Jim Ruehlin, IBM Rational RUP Content Developer Eclipse Process Framework (EPF) Committer www.eclipse.org/epf email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] phone: 760.505.3232 fax: 949.369.0720
_______________________________________________ epf-dev mailing list [email protected] https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/epf-dev
