Re: Second Dimension of Object Oriented Modelling

From: JXStern (JXSternChangeX2R_at_gte.net)
Date: 03/18/04 

Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 17:18:38 GMT

On Thu, 18 Mar 2004 08:01:33 -0500, Ronald E Jeffries
<ronjeffries@acm.org> wrote:

>On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 11:36:55 -0500, "Universe"
><universe@tAkEcovadOuT.net> wrote:
>
>>Yet within a time period, many business contexts have no major changes.
>>But even with changes, we should always try to have an at least
>>minimally complete overall (holistic) analysis of all key aspects before
>>implementing the bulk, or logical high level
>>design heart of a software project.
>>
>>Often after minimally complete analysis the verdict is "Don't Code".
>>Or a radically better and more elegant solution presents itself. XP'ers
>>would hardly ever see either of these options.
>
>So it is apparently your view that
>
> - the XP Release Plan, which causes the team to look at and estimate
>all known stories;
> - the presence of the customer with the team all the time;
> - the team itself working together in a group and in pairs;
>
>will somehow keep them from getting an overall view of the project?

None of those seem the least bit relevant to what Universe is saying.
Though I do not know the XP dogma well enough to know if the XP
Release Plan is ever done before the first line of code is written -
is it? And to what end, having to do with release, would all known
stories be estimated - to assign implementation costs/times? Even
that is not really what the point of Uni's comments are.

>I find that hard to understand. It almost seems that you're saying
>things that just aren't true.

It seems to me you're aggressively misreading the subject and looking
for trouble. 

--
What do I think of Uni's points?  I don't buy holistic arguments, for
one thing.  And I agree with him that the entire XP mindset is to
write code first, last, and always, whether it makes sense or not.
I'm not sure how often his scenario really occurs, that someone has an
idea for a system, does some significant analysis of the *concept*,
not the system itself, and slowly realizes it doesn't fly for some
pragmatic reason.  Now and again, I guess.  That entire discussion
would seem to take place out of the hearing of any XP'r, ever, as a
lot of the thought process involved is qualitative, domain-focused,
and non-computer-technical.
J.

Relevant Pages

  • Gallup: Stimulus bill losing support
    ... After forcing the bill ... middle on whether it should be passed as is or with major changes. ... support for the plan is highly partisan. ... Although few Republicans ...
    (soc.culture.irish)
  • Re: Did Darth Sidious create Anakin?
    ... FICTION, it has to have rules and guidelines. ... Although, since it IS a plot device, there has been major changes in the logic itself. ... Well, considering there are no such folks, it creates a situation where people in the real world can debate to their hearts content on the meaning and ideas the creator of the stories they read have in mind. ...
    (alt.fan.starwars)
  • Re: Woohoo, car fixed... for now.
    ... you become a corporate drone in a suit, if you're enjoying work as it is and ... Problem is, if I try to plan things in major fine detail, even with the ... major changes, just react to what is needed, things not only work out in ...
    (uk.rec.cars.modifications)
  • Re: Does anyone actually do UI storyboarding?
    ... After more than 10 years of project experience I learned that the ... the client asked for several major changes. ... So all the work with the stories was waste of time. ...
    (comp.lang.java.gui)