<snip> > I'm more into a scalable version of the RUP. In my opinion > XP is a hack > of a methodology (the RUP actually covers most of its > issues). XP also > suffers from the misconception that programming is the most important > activity in software development (I would argue requirements gathering > as the most important activity in software > development...programming is > easy, figuring out WHAT to program is hard.... This is not to say I'm > not into an iterative approach to this, only that I think XP is > lacking. At least it admits its own lack of scalability.)
Hmmm... interesting. The nice thing about XP in my opinion is the fact that it's modular as hell and you can take whatever parts from it you want. We don't do XP - we're product-oriented - but use parts of it. A continuous integration process makes discovery of bugs much easier, in the interface part pair programming works perfectly and writing unit tests before you code can be extremely helpful when software has decent requirements... man, this is way too off topic... Alef Arendsen SmartHaven -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
