[epf-dev] No coding in Inception

["Jean Pommier" <pommier@xxxxxxxx>]

I've been on the list for a few weeks now, so sorry if my reaction to
this thread his missing enough context and OpenUP knowledge. Yet, since
we leverage OpenUP in our company, I want to make sure we are not
missing something around the Inception concept. We also met with Ricardo
to assess our use of and contribution to OpenUP, hence the access to
this -dev list.

Bryan Lyons wrote:
> We should discuss the absence of actual coding in the Inception phase
of OpenUP
> as demonstrated by the Inception Iteration capability pattern and then
discuss
> the notion that other parts of the process and method characterize the
architecture
> has had its feasibility "confirmed"... with no code.  This is an issue
worthy of
> discussion with broad participation by the OpenUP/Basic authors.

- First, in our software business we meet prospects and customers either
before they actually launched their project or after. We characterize
the switch from Inception to Elaboration as the official Go/No Go
decision. Within the Inception phase, project stakeholders may have to
demonstrate some concepts and feasibility to get management buy in and,
in the software context, that usually requires some actual modeling and
coding (especially performance benchmarks).

- Another thing is that, to my knowledge, RUP has some coding involved
during the Inception phase (which again makes most sense to me).
Therefore, following generalization principles, I don't see how OpenUP,
which is more general as a foundation, couldn't include the idea of some
coding during Inception. Doesn't mean that there is necessary coding
involved in all situations, but it makes OpenUP more applicable to all
cases by supporting the idea of some coding.

- If the idea behind the previous statement is that a
formal/theoretical/abstract method/approach (as opposed to pragmatic
coding) should be used in Inception, then I think this reduces the
usability and applicability of OpenUP to quite sophisiticated entities
and companies, maybe not something we wish for.

Again, sorry for the long post, hope I'm not too far off topic. In
particular by overstating the Inception/Elaboration inflection point.
Thanks for letting me know otherwise. As suggested by Bryan, looking
forward to hearing back from the OpenUP/Basic authors anyway.

Jean.

PS: by curiosity, is there any other clear cut such as this one on other
disciplines in the phases? I mean a discipline which would not be
present in a certain phase. I thought there was at least "some" of each
discipline in every iteration, some meaning a lot or a little depending
on the phase. But at least some. Makes the process less directive, but
more flexible and applicable.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Jean Pommier, Vice President Methodology, Corporate Quality Office

ILOG Inc., 1195 West Fremont Avenue, Sunnyvale, CA 94087-3832, U.S.A.
T:+1 408 991 7132, F:+1 408 991 7003, jpommier@xxxxxxxx, www.ilog.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------