Sorry, my bad english was there: When I said I, that was the group ;).
Like I said, folks, I don't have ur experience YET, but someday I will ;).
(but of course you'll have MUCH MORE EXPERIENCE, but that's another OT
Thread ;)).
Best Regards and have a nice week everyone.
Rafael Mauricio Nami
On 10/7/05, Vic Cekvenich [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
_Listen_ to the customer,
+1 that requriements is the silver bullet. I address is w/ both mock ups
and prototypes... to demonstrate active listening.
In terms of requirements, my favorite silver bullet is
Cockburn-style Use Cases. Looking
On 10/10/05, Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In terms of requirements, my favorite silver bullet is
Cockburn-style Use Cases. Looking back over some of the requirements
documents I've written over the the years, this Use Case format was my
missing link.
*
On 10/10/05, Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The book is quite good. Low signal to noise ratio.
? ;-)
Michael.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 10/10/05, Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Cockburn includes examples of all that in his book. An author is just
not compelled to include more detail than is needed for a particular
case. Issues like granularity are a matter of taste for particular
team, not an issue proscribed by the
Hi Frank,
Here's the thing about technology, it *evolves*... and it comes as really
odd that you *belive* that people introduce new technology solution,
architecture, design changes, to just make them more market-able!!.
I don't subscribe to this idea, but I would like to add however
On Fri, October 7, 2005 2:33 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Hi Frank,
Here's the thing about technology, it *evolves*... and it comes as
really odd that you *belive* that people introduce new technology
solution, architecture, design changes, to just make them more
market-able!!.
It's not
, October 07, 2005 3:08 PM
To: Struts Users Mailing List
Cc: user@struts.apache.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: OT: RE: Development philosophy and such (was: Base action
class)
On Fri, October 7, 2005 2:33 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Hi Frank,
Here's the thing about technology, it *evolves
On Fri, October 7, 2005 4:10 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
And you are absolutely right that there is no justification for using
new technology just for the heck of it... (And there is a reason some
of the banks still have those mainframes lying around!.) like they say
if it ain't broken,
PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 3:08 PM
To: Struts Users Mailing List
Cc: user@struts.apache.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: OT: RE: Development philosophy and such (was: Base action
class)
On Fri, October 7, 2005 2:33 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Hi Frank,
Here's the thing
Rafael Nami wrote:
If I can't learn it in 2 or 3 days, we don't adopt it.
If you can learn new technologies in 2-3 days you can afford to learn
most anything.
2-3 hrs: Do I care about this technology (right now)?
2-3 days: Can I implement a minimal example and get a feel for it?
2-3 weeks:
On 10/7/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Frank,
Sorry couldn't help but remark that... it seems some people are
forgetting the software engineering basics.. :)
There is no silver bullet!
Damned, and I actually thought I found one :-)
But seriously, I think the
_Listen_ to the customer,
+1 that requriements is the silver bullet. I address is w/ both mock ups
and prototypes... to demonstrate active listening.
.V
http://roomity.com (version 1.3 is live)
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
13 matches
Mail list logo
