Re: up front designs always useless

From: Mark Nicholls (nicholls.mark_at_mtvne.com)
Date: 01/14/05 

Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 18:02:25 -0000

"Ilja Preuß" <preuss@disy.net> wrote in message
news:cs8tel$dna$1@stu1id2.ip.tesion.net...
>
> "Mark Nicholls" <nicholls.mark@mtvne.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
> news:34q7ldF4fojh1U1@individual.net...
>
> > No if he has *committed* to it being a mainstream RDB, then he does not
> need
> > to *commit* to a specific implementation as long as he does *commit* to
a
> > design strategy that allows he to delay a specific *commitment*.
>
> Yes. And if he committed to an even more flexible design, he wouldn't even
> need to commit to a mainstream RDB.

yes.

>
> > So there has to be all sorts of up front commitments in order to
mitigate
> > the delay to the specific one.
>
> I don't think we need to commit to a specific design, just to designing
the
> system so that it remains flexible enough. We don't need to know upfront
> what that design will look like, we only need to be confident that we can
> create it within reasonable costs.

yes, though I do think this does imply that we at least are committing to a
requirement of that design.

>
> To reiterate: we certainly need to *commit* to producing a flexible
design.
> I'd think that Robert could agree to that. We don't need to commit to a
> design upfront, though.
>

RCM will have to talk for himself, I'm more interested in what you would
agree to.

I would think that commiting to flexibility in areas that require that
(because of the above), is good.

commiting to flexibility where you don't need it would be bad.

If you asked me to write you a noddy app now, I would commit to writing it
in C#, on day 1. There may be other choices, but by the time we looked at
them and decided I need retraining at the cost of £10,000, I would have
finished the app and gone home.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Nerds for Kerry
    ... you're always at risk of blowing up your last sample ... When you commit a design to production, ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • Re: Story about the ID-"theory"
    ... ID may assert that the "crime" was committed by design, ... commit to any particular designer, and refuses to "connect dots" that ... I like to think of the classic whodunit rules for evidence, ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: When to Commit?
    ... All commits should always be between logical units of work, ... to commit within a process is that the entire job should have only one ... current month's bill just because the prior month's bill is being ... SO, obviously I too side with Daniel and Sybrand: If you think you need to commit within logical transactions, then you design is very likely flawed. ...
    (comp.databases.oracle.misc)
  • Re: up front designs always useless
    ... >> need to know upfront what that design will look like, ... >> commit to a design upfront, ... future requirements into account, and therefore is so simple that it's very ... Unless you get that flexibility for "free". ...
    (comp.object)
  • Re: up front designs always useless
    ... I don't think we need to commit to a specific design, ... we certainly need to *commit* to producing a flexible design. ... design upfront, though. ...
    (comp.object)