John Plocher wrote: > Brandorr wrote: > >> While working on this could people consider the conflicting messages >> I've heard... "ARC early and often" and "Don't ARC until it's >> completely fleshed out at the CG level." > > > > Any message that says "Don't ARC until ..." seems wrong - in many ways. > > While it may not be possible to "get ARC Commitment" until after some > (potentially significant) prototyping has been done, the more work that > is done in ignorance of architectural constraints, the greater the chance > that that work will need to be thrown away or significantly redone. > > This is why the ARC process STARTS with the expectation that a "heads up" > proposal will be submitted as soon as someone decides they want to > *start* > tinkering with something, and that they will interact with the ARC > regularly > as they flesh out their idea with prototypes, and that, once they are > sure > about what they intend, they will come to an already-educated ARC to seek > commitment for that plan. If done right, that commitment is slam-dunk > easy. > > IMHO, it is a bug that the CG & Project creation process is completely > disconnected from the ARC - it is easier for the ARC to ignore projects > that obviously have no architectural connections (user groups, > portals...) > than it is to pick up the pieces of chaos that arise when projects get to > completion without any ARC interactions at all...
Something that the current ARC process doesn't accomodate well (or at least I don't understand how it would) is for projects that are between a full project and a fast track in terms of complexity and work that needs to be done. I suppose what I'd like to be able to do is: - get most of the details fleshed out, fill in a temporary fast track and file the details that are present as a "heads up" then - work out the rest of the details and provide the remaining information for review and open the case as a fast track. In some ways this sounds like a full project that goes to inception and is voted on and approved there. However I'd be uncomfortable as recommending that as a part for "full projects" as it may set unreasonable expectations for some project teams. Darren
