Good dialog. Bruce I wasn't inferring we were claiming copyright on "Change Management" but rather those people challenging your use of the term were.
I like Ana's suggestion and Maciel's endorsement but also put forward one of my own that is a bit a narrower but maybe apropos to the limited content of this practice "Change Request Management". On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 2:08 PM, Maciel, Eduardo (Brazil R&D) <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > Hello all, > > > > I´m not sure if contributions are expected from non usual contributors, > such as me, but I´d like to opine about this subject. > > > > I agree with Ana Pereira. In my humble opinion, Scope Management is the > best term. > > > > - For most of people Change Management reminds a very strict and > formal process. > > - By "managing the scope" one can understand it comprehends the > management of changes also. > > - The type of change management most of lightweight processes > implement is a different paradigm if compared to traditional change > management and usually are nothing more than keeping the scope under control > (tracking, creating or removing work items). > > > > Regards, > > Maciel > > > > > > *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On > Behalf Of *Ana Paula Valente Pereira > *Sent:* quarta-feira, 13 de agosto de 2008 14:09 > *To:* Eclipse Process Framework Project Developers List > *Subject:* Re: [epf-dev] Renaming "Change Management" practice to "Basic > Change Management" > > > > what about Flexible ? ... Flexible Change or Scope Management? ... > contrasting with traditional change management that seems to be more rigid > ... > > Ana > > On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 5:20 PM, Bruce Macisaac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > Hi Ken, > > I think the point is that without the qualifier, it makes it hard to name > alternative change management practices. > In other words, if we have 3 change management practice alternatives, and > one is called change management, it's hard from the name to know what kind > of change management is being described > by the practice. Also, it may seem unfair for us to claim copyright to > "change management" - by adding some kind of qualifier, at least we are only > claiming our brand of change management. > Another suggestion from Per is "Informal Change Management". > Is that better than "Basic"? > > Note that this practice, as it stands, just has one task, which is to > submit change requests, and otherwise changes are really being addressed as > part of > work item management done by the iterative development practice. It's not > a traditional formal change management approach with a CCB and unique states > for change requests. > > > Bruce MacIsaac > Manager - RUP/OpenUP Content > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > phone: (408)463-5140 > > > *"Ken Clyne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>* > Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > 08/12/2008 01:11 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] Renaming "Change Management" practice to "Basic Change > Management" > > > > > > > I don't know I think you got it right the first time. Firstly, I don't > think its fair for any one group to claim copyright to the term Change > Management. Secondly the term "Basic" is almost pejorative and somehow > diminishes the importance of the practice (think about Basic Project > Management, Basic Architecture etc). Thirdly, I'm not sure we need a > qualifier, one would think the context would be sufficient if we put "Basic" > before one practice what does that mean about the other practices. > > My $0.03 > > > On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 3:46 PM, Bruce Macisaac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > Chris Sibbald and I would like to make this change to address concerns > raised by reviewers. > The basic concern is that they expected from the name that this would be a > formal change management practice, and it's not. > > See bugzilla: > > > > > > > > 243928 <https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=243928> > > > > I plan to make this change tomorrow, so if there are any concerns at all > with this, please let me know as soon as possible. > > Thanks, > > Bruce MacIsaac > Manager - RUP/OpenUP Content* > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > phone: (408)463-5140 > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > >
_______________________________________________ epf-dev mailing list [email protected] https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/epf-dev
