[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
Re: [epf-dev] PM Content - Capability Patterns
|
Thank you Peter for you presentation today... it was very very usefull
... i had no idea of all those features for creating processes and
capanility patterns...its a great tool
Best Regards
Ana
Peter Haumer wrote:
I would vote for just adding them in separate packages. I am all in
favor of providing many alternative patterns and DPs on the same
content as long there is documentation explaining when to use what.
That is exactly the idea behind these concepts. As I see it, you used
'extends' to the existing activities as much as possible so the
documentation of these extended activities is actually reused and you
only have to document your own patterns, which should keep the amount
of work to a minimum. In a few cases you probably want to use new
'local replace deep copy' feature to do some step suppressions of some
individual TDs in your DP, though. I am explaining this feature in the
presentation tomorrow morning and am scheduled to do this for the
original DP tomorrow as well (busy day).
We are not going to provide any features or content for work
components in the first release. This is only in scope for the next
release.
Thanks and best regards,
Peter Haumer.
______________________________________________________________
PETER HAUMER, Dr. rer. nat.
Rational Method Composer | Eclipse Process Framework
Rational Software | IBM Software Group
Tel.: +1 408 863-8716
______________________________________________________________
*Ana Valente Pereira <apereira@xxxxxxxxxxx>*
Sent by: epf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
09/13/2006 19:05
Please respond to
Eclipse Process Framework Project Developers List <epf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To
Eclipse Process Framework Project Developers List <epf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
cc
Subject
Re: [epf-dev] PM Content - Capability Patterns
I know that we have tight deadlines but with some simple changes on what
we have we can make the process simple to newcomers …
it does not make sense that we have 14 capability patterns to group 18
tasks!!
I re-factored my previous proposal to include only 6 capability patterns
(last time I called them collaboration patterns because I was
representing grouping between tasks in different sub-processes, in the
same way that, Chris Armstrong did in the attachment that Bryan Lyons
mentioned)…
I had no idea that Peter Haumer and Vaydia Kirti where working on “work
components” (at content level or at tool level?) but it seems that
nothing in this
proposal conflicts with that because proposed capabilities represent
higher-level goals that can be realized now with tasks
(and with the work components in the next release) .
Besides making the process easier to understand, this approach has other
advantages, for example: iterations are planned in terms of goals and
can be extended adding or removing goals, removing/adding one goal from
the project will remove/add the corresponding work components, i
I don't know who is the owner of the lifecycle content but I am
available for working on it if you find it usefull
Regards
Ana
Brian Lyons wrote:
>hiho,
>
>I like the idea of revisiting the capability patterns.
>
>What is the feasibility of revisiting them in light of your ideas and in
>light of your ideas and Chris Armstrong's capability pattern ideas
>captured in this attachment
>https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/attachment.cgi?id=47379 to bug 152354
>(https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=152354)?
>
>I liked Chris' notion that some patterns might be within a specific
>sub-process but that other capability patterns transcend any one
>sub-process and show how the sub-processes work together. I wouldn't
>want to go down a path of stressing the importance of collaboration and
>then only show it within each sub-process.
>
>I have a fear that this is worthy of more communication & collaboration
>amongst the process authors than can be scheduled in the next few weeks
>as we try to have content reviews to move the existing bugs from
>Verified to Closed. But maybe there are some changes that can be done
>to move us in the right direction.
>
> ------- b
>-----Original Message-----
>From: epf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:epf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
>On Behalf Of Ana Valente Pereira
>Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 7:56 AM
>To: Per Kroll
>Cc: Eclipse Process Framework Project Developers List
>Subject: Re: [epf-dev] PM Content - Capability Patterns
>
>What if we give up on capability patterns per discipline and create some
>
>collaboration patterns instead?...where the several roles have to get
>together to achieve some goal on each of the processes (intent, solution
>
>and management).... please take a look at the attached proposal... i did
>
>not add much text because the collaboration names should speak by itself
>
>on explaining the project lifecycle... I also tried to reuse most of the
>
>existing tasks or capabilities in order to avoid by changes at this time
>
>Ana
>
>Per Kroll wrote:
>
>
>
>>For those interested in Capability Patterns for PM.
>>
>>Impacts
>>_147965_ <https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=147965>
>>
>>
>Wed
>
>
>>12:02 maj P2 PC ASSI EPF Content
>>
>>
>1.0 1.0 M5 PM - Capability
>
>
>>Pattern assess_and_close_out_project - cr...
>>_147967_ <https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=147967>
>>
>>
>Wed
>
>
>>11:24 maj P2 PC ASSI EPF Content
>>
>>
>1.0 1.0 M5 PM - Capability
>
>
>>Pattern assess_and_plan_iteration - creat...
>>_147969_ <https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=147969>
>>22:45:10 maj P2 PC ASSI EPF Content
>>
>>
>1.0 1.0 M5 PM -
>
>
>>Capability Pattern manage_iteration - create content
>>
>>
>>_151783_ <https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=151783>
>>2006-08-23 nor P3 PC RESO EPF Content
>>
>>
>1.0 --- PM - Task:
>
>
>>Close Out Project - remove
>>
>>
>>_147968_ <https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=147968>
>>
>>
>Thu
>
>
>>20:11 maj P2 PC RESO EPF Content
>>
>>
>1.0 1.0 M5 PM - Capability
>
>
>>Pattern initiate_project - create content
>>
>>
>>plus each of the 4 Iteration Capability Patterns, as well as naturally
>>
>>
>
>
>
>>the delivery process itself.
>>
>>I did not find any bugs for these iteration capaility patterns and the
>>
>>
>
>
>
>>delivery process.
>>
>>
>>I suggest that we only have 2 capability patterns for Management:
>>Keep "Initiate Project" as is <Contains Define Vision and Plan the
>>Project>
>>Modify "Manage Iteration" to contain Plan Iteration, Manage Iteration,
>>
>>
>and
>
>
>>Assess Results. Each of the iteration Capability patterns would
>>contain Manage
>>Iteration CP, and only Inception contains Initiate Project.
>>1) This means that Plan Iteration is done in the beginning of
>>iteration, not at
>>the end of previous, which is reflected in the task description.
>>2) It simplifies CP patterns for the iterations.
>>3) It avoids having Plan Iteration in every iteration, since Assess
>>Results is
>>already discussing that you need to update the Project Plan based on
>>
>>
>the
>
>
>>results of the assessment.
>>
>>Comments?
>>
>>I entered this in
>>https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=147969
>>
>>
>>
>>Cheers
>>
>>Per Kroll
>>STSM, Manager Methods: RUP / RMC
>>Project Lead: Eclipse Process Framework
>>Rational Software, IBM Corp
>>408-342-3815
>>
>>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>-
>
>
>>_______________________________________________
>>epf-dev mailing list
>>epf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/epf-dev
>>
>>
>>
>>
>_______________________________________________
>epf-dev mailing list
>epf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/epf-dev
>
>
[attachment "capability_patterns2.ppt" deleted by Peter
Haumer/Cupertino/IBM] _______________________________________________
epf-dev mailing list
epf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/epf-dev
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
epf-dev mailing list
epf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/epf-dev
