Re: [epf-dev] How Much Guidance Attached to Each Discipline?

[Ricardo Balduino <balduino@xxxxxxxxxx>]

I see your concern. We don't want to
be heavy handed when assigning elements to a discipline - for simplicity
reasons and also because disciplines are supposed to organize tasks.
Another possibility is to use custom
categories - instead of disciplines which are standard categories - in
order to organize these elements and create appropriate views for the published
web site.

Still the question remains on how many
elements are too many. Maybe this is a good topic for a break-out session
during the next face-to-face meeting.

Ricardo Balduino
Senior Software Engineer

IBM Rational (www.ibm.com/rational)
EPF Committer (www.eclipse.org/epf)

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

02/04/2007 10:23 AM

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

To	"Eclipse Process Framework Project Developers List" <epf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
cc
Subject	[epf-dev] How Much Guidance Attached to Each Discipline?

hiho,
 
I added in the reference workflows and related
guidance items to the Discipline: Test method element.  
 
I just went whole-hog and put in every guidance
item related to the testing stuff.  I wonder if that is too heavy
handed.  And something that won’t scale up.  It might be nice
for every work product to have a checklist; do all the checklists get thrown
in the treeview under the discipline?  It might be good to have a
number of examples for each work product and organizations extending the
process might have a number of examples per work product; should all that
be thrown right under the discipline in the published process?
 
This sounds like another authoring guideline
that might not be a 100% common EPF authoring guideline, but an OpenUP-specific
authoring rule.  Either “attach all guidelines related to a discipline
to the discipline”.  Or “attach all guidelines except checklists
that are specific to one method element” or “attach all guidelines except
any that are specific to one method element”.
 
I suppose when we are saying that we could
also be explicit to say “attach to the discipline all capability patterns
that utilize any task from the discipline”.  And by that rule we
would have Manage Requirements attached to both the requirements discipline
and the testing discipline, which I think makes sense.
 
BTW, bug 172732
discusses renaming that capability pattern.
 
Any thoughts?
 
           
                     
 ---------------- b_______________________________________________
epf-dev mailing list
epf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/epf-dev