It may not be "business" functionality, but it is behaviour
nonetheless. It may not concern all stakeholders, but there are surely
some stakeholders (e.g. architecture, infrastructure) that would be
interested in it. As such it needs to be expressed and verified.
You could have one set of stories/scenarios that verify the business
functionality with one default (non visible) protocol. Then have
another set of stories that verify the same functionality for different
protocols.
On 05/01/2012 03:18, Sheldon wrote:
Thanks Mauro. I was leaning towards that but it concerned me. It
felt like the implementation was bleeding in to the stories. The
customers rarely distinguish between transport protocols when
discussing requirements, since it is mainly an engineering concern.
So I felt uncomfortable including it in the stories. My hope was to
run the requirements (i.e. stories) twice, one for http and JMS. Your
suggestion is my fall back, though I am still wondering if there is an
alternative solution.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
