RE: [epf-dev] Restructuring OpenUP - Meeting Thu Jan 25, 8-10 AM PST

[Per Kroll <pkroll@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Brian,

please see comments below

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

"Brian Lyons" <blyons@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: epf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

01/25/2007 02:46 PM

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] Restructuring OpenUP - Meeting Thu Jan 25, 8-10 AM PST

hiho,
 
On slide 7, I take issue with the intermixing
of development process stuff and the definition and adoption of the process.
 I think that the Process items are sort of Environment discipline
things that should not be demarked as blue “OpenUP/Basic Practices”.
PKR: Good point. These are
valuable practices for OpenUP, but should probably not be listed under
OpenUP/Basic.
 
I am also concerned with replacing our project
management with something explicitly called Scrum.  We are adopting
Scrum techniques, but must we say we are unambiguously “doing Scrum”?
 Scrum has a Product Backlog and a separate Iteration Backlog; we
have one Work Item List.  Are we going to toe-the-line with Scrum
terms and work products?  What if we meet and decide that we have
a better technique than the Scrum way of doing things for some aspect of
project management?  I appreciate adopting a Scrum perspective in
OpenUP project management, but I am concerned about simply labeling it
as Scrum.
PKR: I think the point was
not that we should provide a Scrum practice, but rather showcase that if
you do not like a practice, you can replace it with another practice. So,
we should clarify and provide another example that may be less confusing,
since we think we are providing a mgmt approach heavily borrowing from,
but improving upon, Scrum.
 
On slide 11, I would be careful to use the
words “Test Cases” rather than just “Tests” in the Intent area so they
are not confused with “Test Scripts”.
PKR: I could be wrong, but
I think this include 1) writing test case, 2) writing test script, 3) validate
script by running it .
This means that it is more than just the Intent portion of testing. It
is tricky to know where to pace work patterns that cross these areas...
 

I’m psyched for Work Patterns.  They
provide a very good chunk of methodology to be able to talk about and adopt
piecemeal.
PKR: I agree. I actually
this this is the most valuable piece of all. Practices are good when assembling
processes, but only few people do that. Work patterns are a great concept
for using a process, which all team members do. I think that if we think
work patterns when we write a process, we will write better process content.
 
As discussed on the call, I want to make
sure the late addition of roles to the methodology content is not going
to be more effort than it is worth.  I don’t discount that it could
add value.  But I am concerned that the repository is too complicated
already with three roles making up the Analyst role for example.  Furthermore,
we often have text in the tasks that talks about collaborating with others.
 The tool currently can publish the right name when the role is mentioned
in the text, but if we decouple the tasks from any knowledge of roles the
text could get so abstract that we lose clarity (e.g. “Collaborate with
someone who knows how to do detailed requirements on this”, “ensure that
someone who has authority over the scope agrees with that”).
PKR: Your concerns are fair.
We need to make sure that this works in practice. I think work patterns
will help us to write extremely concrete process guidance. "No, do
not tell me how I do design of a scenario, tell me how I do design using
TDD, when my scenario will impact the architecture". We need to make
sure that late role assignment does not make the process too vague. I think
there is a solution, but we need to make sure that is the case.

           
                   ------------
b

---

From: epf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:epf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Per Kroll
Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 8:06 PM
To: Eclipse Process Framework Project Developers List
Subject: Fw: [epf-dev] Restructuring OpenUP - Meeting Thu Jan 25, 8-10
AM PST
 

Hi, 

attached you find the slides we will walk through tomorrow. We are looking
forward to a constructive discussion.

Cheers 

Per Kroll
STSM, Manager Methods: RUP / RMC
Project Lead: Eclipse Process Framework
Rational Software, IBM Corp
(M) 408-219-2963 
----- Forwarded by Per Kroll/Cupertino/IBM on 01/24/2007 08:03 PM -----

Per Kroll/Cupertino/IBM@IBMUS
Sent by: epf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

01/19/2007 10:35 AM

Please respond to
Eclipse Process Framework Project Developers List        <epf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>

To	Eclipse Process Framework Project Developers List <epf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
cc	epf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx, epf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject	Re: [epf-dev] Restructuring OpenUP - Meeting Thu Jan 25, 8-10 AM PST

 

Hi, 

corrected date and specified timezone...
Thu Jan 25, 8-10 AM PST. 

Cheers 

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

Per Kroll/Cupertino/IBM@IBMUS
Sent by: epf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

01/19/2007 12:38 AM

Please respond to
Eclipse Process Framework Project Developers List        <epf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>

To	epf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
cc
Subject	[epf-dev] Restructuring OpenUP - Meeting Thu Jan 24, 8-10 AM

 

Hi, 

We would like to discuss some problems we have identified with the current
structure, and propos some ideas on how they could be addressed. We hope
this presentation will generate a good discussion and additional innovation.
Topics will include:
1) How to achieve a higher degree of reuse of process content between different
processes
2) How to allow more flexibility around role assignments
3) How to allow you to provide a more easily configurable proces
4 )     How to improve
usability, and align the presentation of OpenUP with OpenUP's adaptive
mgmt approach and work-item focused approach to development.

Toll-free dial-in: 1-877-421-0003
Toll dial-in: 1-770-615-1374
<For IBMers> Tie-line dial-in: 421-0003
Participant passcode: 667201

http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/eclipseprocessframework/cal///group/eclipseprocessframework?v=4&t=1169712000&i=727&pv=2

Per Kroll
STSM, Manager Methods: RUP / RMC
Project Lead: Eclipse Process Framework
Rational Software, IBM Corp
(M) 408-219-2963_______________________________________________
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_______________________________________________
epf-dev mailing list
epf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/epf-dev