Re: [epf-dev] Renaming "Change Management" practice to "Basic Change Man

[Bruce Macisaac <bmacisaa@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Ken,

I think the point is that without the
qualifier, it makes it hard to name alternative change management practices.
In other words, if we have 3 change
management practice alternatives, and one is called change management,
it's hard from the name to know what kind of change management is being
described
by the practice.  Also, it may
seem unfair for us to claim copyright to "change management"
- by adding some kind of qualifier, at least we are only claiming our brand
of change management.
Another suggestion from Per is "Informal
Change Management".
Is that better than "Basic"?

Note that this practice, as it stands,
just has one task, which is to submit change requests, and otherwise changes
are really being addressed as part of 
work item management done by the iterative
development practice.  It's not a traditional formal change management
approach with a CCB and unique states for change requests.

Bruce MacIsaac
Manager - RUP/OpenUP Content
bmacisaa@xxxxxxxxxx
phone: (408)463-5140

"Ken Clyne" <ken.clyne@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: epf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

08/12/2008 01:11 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] Renaming "Change Management" practice to "Basic Change        Management"

I don't know I think you got it right the first time.
 Firstly, I don't think its fair for any one group to claim copyright
to the term Change Management. Secondly the term "Basic" is almost
pejorative and somehow diminishes the importance of the practice (think
about Basic Project Management, Basic Architecture etc).  Thirdly,
I'm not sure we need a qualifier, one would think the context would be
sufficient if we put "Basic" before one practice what does that
mean about the other practices.

My $0.03


On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 3:46 PM, Bruce Macisaac <bmacisaa@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

Chris Sibbald and I would like to make this change to address concerns
raised by reviewers. 
The basic concern is that they expected from the name that this would be
a formal change management practice, and it's not.

See bugzilla:

243928

I plan to make this change tomorrow,
so if there are any concerns at all with this, please let me know as soon
as possible. 

Thanks, 

Bruce MacIsaac
Manager - RUP/OpenUP Content
bmacisaa@xxxxxxxxxx
phone: (408)463-5140


_______________________________________________
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