Hi Brian,

please see comments below

Per Kroll
STSM, Manager Methods: RUP / RMC
Project Lead: Eclipse Process Framework
Rational Software, IBM Corp
(M) 408-219-2963



"Brian Lyons" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
01/25/2007 02:46 PM
Please respond to
Eclipse Process Framework Project Developers List <[email protected]>


To
"Eclipse Process Framework Project Developers List" <[email protected]>
cc

Subject
RE: [epf-dev] Restructuring OpenUP - Meeting Thu Jan 25, 8-10 AM PST






hiho,
 
On slide 7, I take issue with the intermixing of development process stuff 
and the definition and adoption of the process.  I think that the Process 
items are sort of Environment discipline things that should not be 
demarked as blue ?OpenUP/Basic Practices?.
PKR: Good point. These are valuable practices for OpenUP, but should 
probably not be listed under OpenUP/Basic.
 
I am also concerned with replacing our project management with something 
explicitly called Scrum.  We are adopting Scrum techniques, but must we 
say we are unambiguously ?doing Scrum??  Scrum has a Product Backlog and a 
separate Iteration Backlog; we have one Work Item List.  Are we going to 
toe-the-line with Scrum terms and work products?  What if we meet and 
decide that we have a better technique than the Scrum way of doing things 
for some aspect of project management?  I appreciate adopting a Scrum 
perspective in OpenUP project management, but I am concerned about simply 
labeling it as Scrum.
PKR: I think the point was not that we should provide a Scrum practice, 
but rather showcase that if you do not like a practice, you can replace it 
with another practice. So, we should clarify and provide another example 
that may be less confusing, since we think we are providing a mgmt 
approach heavily borrowing from, but improving upon, Scrum.
 
On slide 11, I would be careful to use the words ?Test Cases? rather than 
just ?Tests? in the Intent area so they are not confused with ?Test 
Scripts?.
PKR: I could be wrong, but I think this include 1) writing test case, 2) 
writing test script, 3) validate script by running it .
This means that it is more than just the Intent portion of testing. It is 
tricky to know where to pace work patterns that cross these areas...
 

I?m psyched for Work Patterns.  They provide a very good chunk of 
methodology to be able to talk about and adopt piecemeal.
PKR: I agree. I actually this this is the most valuable piece of all. 
Practices are good when assembling processes, but only few people do that. 
Work patterns are a great concept for using a process, which all team 
members do. I think that if we think work patterns when we write a 
process, we will write better process content.
 
As discussed on the call, I want to make sure the late addition of roles 
to the methodology content is not going to be more effort than it is 
worth.  I don?t discount that it could add value.  But I am concerned that 
the repository is too complicated already with three roles making up the 
Analyst role for example.  Furthermore, we often have text in the tasks 
that talks about collaborating with others.  The tool currently can 
publish the right name when the role is mentioned in the text, but if we 
decouple the tasks from any knowledge of roles the text could get so 
abstract that we lose clarity (e.g. ?Collaborate with someone who knows 
how to do detailed requirements on this?, ?ensure that someone who has 
authority over the scope agrees with that?).
PKR: Your concerns are fair. We need to make sure that this works in 
practice. I think work patterns will help us to write extremely concrete 
process guidance. "No, do not tell me how I do design of a scenario, tell 
me how I do design using TDD, when my scenario will impact the 
architecture". We need to make sure that late role assignment does not 
make the process too vague. I think there is a solution, but we need to 
make sure that is the case. 
                               ------------ b

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On 
Behalf Of Per Kroll
Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 8:06 PM
To: Eclipse Process Framework Project Developers List
Subject: Fw: [epf-dev] Restructuring OpenUP - Meeting Thu Jan 25, 8-10 AM 
PST
 

Hi, 

attached you find the slides we will walk through tomorrow. We are looking 
forward to a constructive discussion. 

Cheers 

Per Kroll
STSM, Manager Methods: RUP / RMC
Project Lead: Eclipse Process Framework
Rational Software, IBM Corp
(M) 408-219-2963 
----- Forwarded by Per Kroll/Cupertino/IBM on 01/24/2007 08:03 PM ----- 

Per Kroll/Cupertino/[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
01/19/2007 10:35 AM 


Please respond to
Eclipse Process Framework Project Developers List <[email protected]>



To
Eclipse Process Framework Project Developers List <[email protected]> 
cc
[email protected], [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Subject
Re: [epf-dev] Restructuring OpenUP - Meeting Thu Jan 25, 8-10 AM PST
 


 
 





Hi, 

corrected date and specified timezone... 
Thu Jan 25, 8-10 AM PST. 

Cheers 

Per Kroll
STSM, Manager Methods: RUP / RMC
Project Lead: Eclipse Process Framework
Rational Software, IBM Corp
(M) 408-219-2963 

Per Kroll/Cupertino/[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
01/19/2007 12:38 AM 


Please respond to
Eclipse Process Framework Project Developers List <[email protected]>



To
[email protected] 
cc
 
Subject
[epf-dev] Restructuring OpenUP - Meeting Thu Jan 24, 8-10 AM
 


 
 






Hi, 

We would like to discuss some problems we have identified with the current 
structure, and propos some ideas on how they could be addressed. We hope 
this presentation will generate a good discussion and additional 
innovation. Topics will include:
1) How to achieve a higher degree of reuse of process content between 
different processes
2) How to allow more flexibility around role assignments
3) How to allow you to provide a more easily configurable proces 
4 )     How to improve usability, and align the presentation of OpenUP 
with OpenUP's adaptive mgmt approach and work-item focused approach to 
development. 

Toll-free dial-in: 1-877-421-0003
Toll dial-in: 1-770-615-1374
<For IBMers> Tie-line dial-in: 421-0003
Participant passcode: 667201 

http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/eclipseprocessframework/cal///group/eclipseprocessframework?v=4&t=1169712000&i=727&pv=2
 


Per Kroll
STSM, Manager Methods: RUP / RMC
Project Lead: Eclipse Process Framework
Rational Software, IBM Corp
(M) 408-219-2963_______________________________________________
epf-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/epf-dev
_______________________________________________
epf-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/epf-dev
_______________________________________________
epf-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/epf-dev

_______________________________________________
epf-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/epf-dev

Reply via email to