[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
[epf-dev] Size matters...


I hope you will find the attached spreadsheet very interesting. Thanks Brian for helping out to produce it.

It shows for each package (minus General, I did not do this yet)
1) How many method elements we have of each type
2) How many pages of core content we have (pages of actual text for roles, artifacts and tasks)
3) How many pages of Guidance content we have (pages of actual text for all Guidance types minus Examples and Templates, since I do not think these should count)

Some observations:
- We have a total of 45 pages of core content. This is all you need to read to get a complete process. Great.
- We have a total of 140 pages of guidance content. This is pretty OK, but there are some imbalances we should fix.
- There is a reasonable balance across the packages in terms of # of method elements. This is good.
- There is twice the number of pages for Requirements than for the average package. We need to fix that. Good news, the reviews we have had will cut down the pages a lot (but my guess, not enough).
- Test is weak. Not many pages there.
- Project management and requirements has almost all the templates. Does that make sense? Probably, because you typically use whiteboard or tools for the other packages....
- Project management and Architecture has all examples. I think other areas should have examples too. OK, I have fought against investing a lot in examples, but I thought we had some... Can we produce one example for each artifact??

Some more detailed comments
- Guidance around Use Cases: 27 pages is way too much
- Concept: Using Visualization is empty => Remove
- I think we can have one Concept for Mechanisms. I do not think we need 4; Analysis, Design, Architectural, Implementation
- Gudieline: Design Components Representation is empty => Remove
- Guideline: Design Visually => I think too long. Especially considering that we also have a Concept paper on 2 pages. I rather have us guide on how to do certain type of design, which may include Visual Modeling, than talk about Visual Modeling for the sake of visual modeling....
- Can we merge Concept: Pattern and Concept: Business Pattern?
- Test has way too short descriptions throughout. 0.1 pages, 0.25 pages, ....
- Test probably also have too few process elements..
- Change Request: I suggest removing Concept and Guideline and moving the text (even extended versions of the current text) to the Artifact and Task. I do not think we need to explain what a Change request is, it is pretty obvious. Look at the artifact if you do not know.
- Do we need more meat in project mgmt? Or is this the ideal length? Feels like the guidelines here are briefer than in other areas. I think partially because almost all of the content has been written from scratch versus in many other areas, a lengthier version has been shorten down...


Per Kroll
STSM, Manager Methods: RUP / RMC
Project Lead: Eclipse Process Framework
Rational Software, IBM Corp
(M) 408-219-2963

Attachment: OpenUP Content v0.3.xls
Description: MS-Excel spreadsheet