[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
Re: [epf-dev] Intro page + Plus comments for all content leads++
|
One comment on the first paragraph:
Instead of having all the roles in the collaboration sub-process (
including the "any role" that nobody seems to like and the stakeholder
role that seems to be passive in the process) what don't we have only 2
roles: "team member" and "stakeholder" ?.... the other open up roles
such as analyst, architect, developer could extent "team member" (i
believe that we can do that with the tool) ... and be placed at the
corresponding sub-process. Like this we could assign to the team member
specific collaboration and communication tasks (that we don't have yet)...
We could also add some tasks to the stakeholder to show his
responsibilities (besides participating on the others) for instance:
prioritize requirements or provide feedback on the solution
One comment on the management sub-process:
it is the only one that you do not mention work products ... i don't
know if you want to mention the work items list?
Regards
Ana
Per Kroll wrote:
Hi,
attached you find my draft description of each subprocess and the
foundational collaboration layer. I am writing this disconnected, so
cannot put it into bugzilla right now.
The text would probably benefit from a graph for each sub-process to
capture the essence of that sub-process. I have not yet reflected on
what such a graph may look like.
As I wrote the text, I made a number of comments that I hope is a good
read for all content leads, as well as other people writing content. I
e.g. suggest changes to most of the tasks in Intent and Solutions
Development to better reflect collaborative development, with more
roles involved in the various tasks. I think the counter-argument is
that if every role needs to participate in every task, does that not
only clutter the model? That would be a valid concern, but as a
minimum, we need to make sure that it is crystal clear to the analyst
that they should not only capture requirements, but that they need to
involve developers, architects and testers to validate the
requriements and ensure that they are understood. This could be done
through a simple change to the step "Achieve Concurrence". The same
type of thinking probably applies to most or at least many tasks in
the intent and solutions development sub-processes.
Comments?
Cheers
Per Kroll
STSM, Manager Methods: RUP / RMC
Project Lead: Eclipse Process Framework
Rational Software, IBM Corp
408-342-3815
*Bruce Macisaac/Cupertino/IBM@IBMUS*
Sent by: epf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
09/14/2006 09:01 PM
Please respond to
Eclipse Process Framework Project Developers List <epf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To
steve@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
cc
"'Eclipse Process Framework Project Developers List'"
<epf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject
[epf-dev] Intro page
Hi Steve,
As you recall, at Wednesday's status meeting I expressed the concern
that the intro graphic, while cool, introduces another set of things
that look a lot like the disciplines, which could be confusing. To
address this concern, Per has agreed to draft up some pages for each
of these areas.
After Sept 30, we can further explore my proposal to align these areas
with the disciplines.
(For reference, here is what I had in mind - although from informal
discussions, it looks like it will take a while to gel):
- rename "Intent" to be "Requirements", to match the discipline
- Solution would have sub-disciplines of Implementation, Test, AnD,
and later deployment.
- Management would have CM and Project Management, and later Environment.
- Communication and Collaboration becomes a new discipline that
describes general concepts and responsibilities of all team members.
For now, the Any Role and "submit a change request" would be in this
discipline. Longer term would be general review procedures, guidance
on scrums, searching for reusable assets and
providing feedback, resolving conflict, etc.)
Hope that works for you.
Cheers,
Bruce MacIsaac
Manager - RUP/OpenUP Content
bmacisaa@xxxxxxxxxx
phone: (408)863-8718
_______________________________________________
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