Search Results

Search found 5405 results on 217 pages for 'minimal requirements'.

Page 21/217 | < Previous Page | 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28  | Next Page >

  • OUM is Flexible and Scalable

    - by user535886
    Flexible and Scalable Traditionally, projects have been focused on satisfying the contents of a requirements document or rigorously conforming to an existing set of work products. Often, especially where iterative and incremental techniques have not been employed, these requirements may be inaccurate, the previous deliverables may be flawed, or the business needs may have changed since the start of the project. Fitness for business purpose, derived from the Dynamic Systems Development Method (DSDM) framework, refers to the focus of delivering necessary functionality within a required timebox. The solution can be more rigorously engineered later, if such an approach is acceptable. Our collective experience shows that applying fit-for-purpose criteria, rather than tight adherence to requirements specifications, results in an information system that more closely meets the needs of the business. In OUM, this principle is extended to refer to the execution of the method processes themselves. Project managers and practitioners are encouraged to scale OUM to be fit-for-purpose for a given situation. It is rarely appropriate to execute every activity within OUM. OUM provides guidance for determining the core set of activities to be executed, the level of detail targeted in those activities and their associated tasks, and the frequency and type of end user deliverables. The project workplan should be developed from this core. The plan should then be scaled up, rather than tailored down, to the level of discipline appropriate to the identified risks and requirements. Even at the task level, models and work products should be completed only to the level of detail required for them to be fit-for-purpose within the current iteration or, at the project level, to suit the business needs of the enterprise and to meet the contractual obligations that govern the project. OUM provides well defined templates for many of its tasks. Use of these templates is optional as determined by the context of the project. Work products can easily be a model in a repository, a prototype, a checklist, a set of application code, or, in situations where a high degree of agility is warranted, simply the tacit knowledge contained in the brain of an analyst or practitioner. For further reading on agility, see Balancing Agility and Discipline: A guide fro the Perplexed.

    Read the article

  • The path to MCSE:SharePoint. The Overview.

    - by Enrique Lima
    There have been some changes to certifications recently.  And with that new challenges and requirements.  In the past we had MCTS and MCITP or MCPD on a specific product and that was it, now the story is somewhat different. You will need to not only know the product (yes, I am one that still focuses on knowing a product not the test) but also the environment on which it sits or lives (therefore Windows Server and supporting services). The requirements for MCSE: SharePoint now take you through the MCSA:Windows Server 2012.  Many have questioned this, I don’t. Why? I have seen plenty of “accidental SharePoint Farm Administrators” that have no background with the Server OS, much less with the services (like DNS and IIS).  Again, I am not saying this will guarantee knowledge but it does in some way require exposure to it. So, again, the next number of posts will be to provide guidance for the needed knowledge for the test requirements.  If you have seen the way I go about this, you then know I don’t focus on exam questions, but rather providing guidance to the TechNet and MSDN documentation to get to know the product.  I will also in this case go through the process to setup your virtual environment to play with the products and get to know them. Now, the requirements themselves are: MCSA: Windows Server 2012. Exam 70-410: Installing and Configuring Windows Server 2012 Exam 70-411: Administering Windows Server 2012 Exam 70-412: Configuring Advanced Windows Server 2012 Services SharePoint specific exams. Exam 70-331: Core Solutions of Microsoft SharePoint Server 2013 Exam 70-332: Advanced Solutions of Microsoft SharePoint Server 2013 Passing the 5 exams will grant you the MCSE: SharePoint credential.

    Read the article

  • Many small scripts, one repository or multiple?

    - by The Jug
    A co-worker and myself have run into an issue that we have multiple opinions on. Currently we have a git repository that we are keeping all of our cronjobs in. There are about 20 crons and they are not really related except for the fact that they are all small python scripts and essential for some activity. We are using a fabric.py file to deploy and a requirements.txt file to manage requirements for all of the scripts. Our issue is basically, do we keep all of these scripts in one git repository or should we be separating them out into their own repositories? By keeping them in one repository it is easier to deploy them onto one server. We can use just one cron file for all the scripts. However this feels wrong, as the 20 cronjobs are not logically related. Additionally, when using one requirements.txt file for all the scripts, it's hard to figure out what the dependencies are for a particular script and they all have to use the same versions of packages. We could separate all of the scripts out into their own repositories but this creates 20 different repositories that need to be remembered and dealt with. Most of these scripts are not very large and that solution seems to be overkill. A related question is, do we use one big crontab file for all cronjobs, or a separate file for each? If each has their own, how does one crontab's installation avoid overwriting the other 19? This also seems like a pain as there would then by 20 different cron files to keep track of. In short, our main question and issue is do we keep them all closely bundled as one repository or do we separate them out into their own repository with their own requirements.txt and fabfile.py? We feel like we're also probably looking over some really simple solution. Is there an easier way to deal with this issue?

    Read the article

  • Quick and Good: ( Requirement -> Validation -> Design ) for self use?

    - by Yugal Jindle
    How to casually do the required Software Engineering and designing? I am an inexperienced developer and face the following problem: My company is a start up and has no fix Software engineering systems. I am assigned tasks with not very clear and conflicting requirements. I don't have to follow any designs or verify requirements officially. Problem: I code all day and finally get stuck where requirement conflicts and I have to start over again. I can-not spend a lot of time doing proper SRS or SDD. How should I: List out Requirements for myself. (Not an official document) How to verify and validate the requirements? How to visualize them? How to design them with minimum effort? (As its going to be with me only) I don't want to waste my time coding something that's gonna collapse according to requirement conflict or something! I don't want to compromise with quality but don't want to re-write everything on some change that I didn't expected. I imagine making a diagram for my thought process that will show me conflict in the diagram itself, then finally correcting the diagram - I decide my design and structure my code in terms of interfaces or something. And then finally start implementing my design. I am able to sense the lack of systematic approach, but don't know how to proceed! Update: Please suggest me some tools that can ask me the questions and help me aggregate important details. How can I have diagram that I talked about for requirement verification?

    Read the article

  • Is there a maximum of open files per process in Linux?

    - by Malax
    My question is pretty simple and is actually stated in the title. One of my applications throws errors regarding "too many open files" at me, even tho the limit for the user the application runs with is higher than the default of 1024 (lsof -u $USER reports 3000 open fds). Because I cannot imagine why this happens, I guess there might be a maximum per process. Any idea is very appreciated! Edit: Some values that might help... root@Debian-60-squeeze-64-minimal ~ # ulimit -n 100000 root@Debian-60-squeeze-64-minimal ~ # tail -n 4 /etc/security/limits.conf myapp soft nofile 100000 myapp hard nofile 1000000 root soft nofile 100000 root hard nofile 1000000 root@Debian-60-squeeze-64-minimal ~ # lsof -n -u myapp | wc -l 2708

    Read the article

  • How to connect to a wireless network that has a two word name with a space?

    - by grinan
    Ok, I have searched for some time in earnest for an answer to this question. I have a Beagleboard which has Ubuntu 10.10 Minimal install for Arm running on it. With the default install, minimal tools, no GUI, I am unable to connect to my wireless network. The name of my network is "MYNAME NETWORK". Using a text editor to edit /etc/network/interfaces I can not seem to connect at all. As an experiment, I connected to a friends network, which has a one word name "dystek",and was able to connect with Zero issues, and update and install a full GUI for ubuntu Arm. The problem is that I don't want a full blown gui on the beagleboard, just a minimal install of ubuntu with CLI is all I need or want. Is there anyway to connect to my wireless network via editing the /etc/network/interfaces file. Surely there is... I just don't know how. Right now my interfaces file looks like this: auto lo iface lo inet loopback auto wlan0 iface wlan0 inet static address 192.168.1.200 netmask 255.255.255.0 gateway 192.168.1.1 wireless-essid BARRETT NETWORK wireless-key 46456xxxxxxxx Any help would be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Would you go by WPF or WinForms? [on hold]

    - by Lorem Ipsum
    Consider the following project facts/requirements: Desktop app with try icon and notification system Forms over data Quick response needed Internal app in big corporation planned to be hosted on Windows Vista, later maybe Windows 8.x Operating system slowed down by many group policies (frequently changing GPO) No special graphic requirements So, would you go by WPF or WinForms? Edit: Please bear in mind the facts/requirements I mentioned above. The application will run on corporate machines which are very slow and without really good graphical acceleration. The crucial is to have really quick response and start time.

    Read the article

  • ACORD LOMA Session Highlights Policy Administration Trends

    - by [email protected]
    Helen Pitts, senior product marketing manager for Oracle Insurance, attended and is blogging from the ACORD LOMA Insurance Forum this week. Above: Paul Vancheri, Chief Information Officer, Fidelity Investments Life Insurance Company. Vancheri gave a presentation during the ACORD LOMA Insurance Systems Forum about the key elements of modern policy administration systems and how insurers can mitigate risk during legacy system migrations to safely introduce new technologies. When I had a few particularly challenging honors courses in college my father, a long-time technology industry veteran, used to say, "If you don't know how to do something go ask the experts. Find someone who has been there and done that, don't be afraid to ask the tough questions, and apply and build upon what you learn." (Actually he still offers this same advice today.) That's probably why my favorite sessions at industry events, like the ACORD LOMA Insurance Forum this week, are those that include insight on industry trends and case studies from carriers who share their experiences and offer best practices based upon their own lessons learned. I had the opportunity to attend a particularly insightful session Wednesday as Craig Weber, senior vice president of Celent's Insurance practice, and Paul Vancheri, CIO of Fidelity Life Investments, presented, "Managing the Dynamic Insurance Landscape: Enabling Growth and Profitability with a Modern Policy Administration System." Policy Administration Trends Growing the business is the top issue when it comes to IT among both life and annuity and property and casualty carriers according to Weber. To drive growth and capture market share from competitors, carriers are looking to modernize their core insurance systems, with 65 percent of those CIOs participating in recent Celent research citing plans to replace their policy administration systems. Weber noted that there has been continued focus and investment, particularly in the last three years, by software and technology vendors to offer modern, rules-based, configurable policy administration solutions. He added that these solutions are continuing to evolve with the ongoing aim of helping carriers rapidly meet shifting business needs--whether it is to launch new products to market faster than the competition, adapt existing products to meet shifting consumer and /or regulatory demands, or to exit unprofitable markets. He closed by noting the top four trends for policy administration either in the process of being adopted today or on the not-so-distant horizon for the future: Underwriting and service desktops New business automation Convergence of ultra-configurable and domain content-rich systems Better usability and screen design Mitigating the Risk When Making the Decision to Modernize Third-party analyst research from advisory firms like Celent was a key part of the due diligence process for Fidelity as it sought a replacement for its legacy policy administration system back in 2005, according to Vancheri. The company's business opportunities were outrunning system capability. Its legacy system had not been upgraded in several years and was deficient from a functionality and currency standpoint. This was constraining the carrier's ability to rapidly configure and bring new and complex products to market. The company sought a new, modern policy administration system, one that would enable it to keep pace with rapid and often unexpected industry changes and ahead of the competition. A cross-functional team that included representatives from finance, actuarial, operations, client services and IT conducted an extensive selection process. This process included deep documentation review, pilot evaluations, demonstrations of required functionality and complex problem-solving, infrastructure integration capability, and the ability to meet the company's desired cost model. The company ultimately selected an adaptive policy administration system that met its requirements to: Deliver ease of use - eliminating paper and rework, while easing the burden on representatives to sell and service annuities Provide customer parity - offering Web-based capabilities in alignment with the company's focus on delivering a consistent customer experience across its business Deliver scalability, efficiency - enabling automation, while simplifying and standardizing systems across its technology stack Offer desired functionality - supporting Fidelity's product configuration / rules management philosophy, focus on customer service and technology upgrade requirements Meet cost requirements - including implementation, professional services and licenses fees and ongoing maintenance Deliver upon business requirements - enabling the ability to drive time to market for new products and flexibility to make changes Best Practices for Addressing Implementation Challenges Based upon lessons learned during the company's implementation, Vancheri advised carriers to evaluate staffing capabilities and cultural impacts, review business requirements to avoid rebuilding legacy processes, factor in dependent systems, and review policies and practices to secure customer data. His formula for success: upfront planning + clear requirements = precision execution. Achieving a Return on Investment Vancheri said the decision to replace their legacy policy administration system and deploy a modern, rules-based system--before the economic downturn occurred--has been integral in helping the company adapt to shifting market conditions, while enabling growth in its direct channel sales of variable annuities. Since deploying its new policy admin system, the company has reduced its average time to market for new products from 12-15 months to 4.5 months. The company has since migrated its other products to the new system and retired its legacy system, significantly decreasing its overall product development cycle. From a processing standpoint Vancheri noted the company has achieved gains in automation, information, and ease of use, resulting in improved real-time data edits, controls for better quality, and tax handling capability. Plus, with by having only one platform to manage, the company has simplified its IT environment and is well positioned to deliver system enhancements for greater efficiencies. Commitment to Continuing the Investment In the short and longer term future Vancheri said the company plans to enhance business functionality to support money movement, wire automation, divorce processing on payout contracts and cost-based tracking improvements. It also plans to continue system upgrades to remain current as well as focus on further reducing cycle time, driving down maintenance costs, and integrating with other products. Helen Pitts is senior product marketing manager for Oracle Insurance focused on life/annuities and enterprise document automation.

    Read the article

  • Choosing the Right Financial Consolidation and Reporting Solution

    Financial reporting requirements for publicly-held companies are changing and getting more complex. With the upcoming convergence of US GAAP and IFRS, demand for more detailed non-financial disclosures, and the SEC mandate for XBRL financial executives are under pressure to ensure they have the right systems in place to support current and future reporting requirements. Tune into this conversation with Rich Clayton, VP of Enterprise Performance Management and BI products for Oracle, and Annette Melatti, Senior Director of Product Marketing for Financial Applications to learn about the latest market requirements, what capabilities are provided by Oracle's General Ledgers, and how customers can extend their investment in Oracle General Ledger solutions with Oracle's market-leading financial close and reporting products.

    Read the article

  • Website development from scratch v/s web framework [duplicate]

    - by Ali
    This question already has an answer here: What should every programmer know about web development? 1 answer Do people develop websites from scratch when there are no particular requirements or they just pick up an existing web framework like Drupal, Joomla, WordPress, etc. The requirements are almost similar in most cases; if personal, it will be a blog or image gallery; if corporate, it will be information pages that can be updated dynamically along with news section. And similarly, there are other requirements which can be fulfilled by WordPress, Joomla or Drupal. So, Is it advisable to develop a website from scratch and why ? Update: to explain more as got commentt from @Raynos (thanks for comment and helping me clearify the question), the question is about: Should web sites be developed and designed fully from scratch? Should they be done by using framework like Spring, Zend, CakePHP? Should they be done using CMS like Joomla, WordPress, Drupal (people in east are using these as frameworks)?

    Read the article

  • Creating the Business Card Request InfoPath Form

    - by JKenderdine
    Business Card Request Demo Files Back in January I spoke at SharePoint Saturday Virginia Beach about InfoPath forms and Web Part deployment.  Below is some of the information and details regarding the form I created for the session.  There are many blogs and Microsoft articles on how to create a basic form so I won’t repeat that information here.   This blog will just explain a few of the options I chose when creating the solutions for SPS Virginia Beach.  The above link contains the zipped package files of the two InfoPath forms(no code solution and coded solution), the list template for the Location list I used, and the PowerPoint deck.  If you plan to use these templates, you will need to update the forms to work within your own environments (change data connections, code links, etc.).  Also, you must have the SharePoint Enterprise version, with InfoPath Services configured in order to use the Web Browser enabled forms. So what are the requirements for this template? Business Card Request Form Template Design Plan: Gather user information and requirements for card Pull in as much user information as possible. Use data from the user profile web services as a data source Show and hide fields as necessary for requirements Create multiple views – one for those submitting the form and Another view for the executive assistants placing the orders. Browser based form integrated into SharePoint team site Submitted directly to form library The base form was created using the blank template.  The table and rows were added using Insert tab and selecting Custom Table.  The use of tables is a great way to make sure everything lines up.  You do have to split the tables from time to time.  If you’ve ever split cells and then tried to re-align one to find that you impacted the others, you know why.  Here is what the base form looks like in InfoPath.   Show and hide fields as necessary for requirements You will notice I also used Sections within the form.  These show or hide depending on options selected or whether or not fields are blank.  This is a great way to prevent your users from feeling overwhelmed with a large form (this one wouldn’t apply).  Although not used in this one, you can also use various views with a tab interface.  I’ll show that in another post. Gather user information and requirements for card Pull in as much user information as possible. Use data from the user profile web services as a data source Utilizing rules you can load data when the form initiates (Data tab, Form Load).  Anything you can automate is always appreciated by the user as that is data they don’t have to enter.  For example, loading their user id or other user information on load: Always keep in mind though how much data you load and the method for loading that data (through rules, code, etc.).  They have an impact on form performance.  The form will take longer to load if you bring in a ton of data from external sources.  Laura Rogers has a great blog post on using the User Information List to load user information.   If the user has logged into SharePoint, then this can be used quite effectively and without a huge performance hit.   What I have found is that using the User Profile service via code behind or the Web Service “GetUserProfileByName” (as above) can take more time to load the user data.  Just food for thought. You must add the data connection in order for the above rules to work.  You can connect to the data connection through the Data tab, Data Connections or select Manage Data Connections link which appears under the main data source.  The data connections can be SharePoint lists or libraries, SQL data tables, XML files, etc.  Create multiple views – one for those submitting the form and Another view for the executive assistants placing the orders. You can also create multiple views for the users to enhance their experience.  Once they’ve entered the information and submitted their request for business cards, they don’t really need to see the main data input screen any more.  They just need to view what they entered. From the Page Design tab, select New View and give the view a name.  To review the existing views, click the down arrow under View: The ReviewView shows just what the user needs and nothing more: Once you have everything configured, the form should be tested within a Test SharePoint environment before final deployment to production.  This validates you don’t have any rules or code that could impact the server negatively. Submitted directly to form library   You will need to know the form library that you will be submitting to when publishing the template.  Configure the Submit data connection to connect to this library.  There is already one configured in the sample,  but it will need to be updated to your environment prior to publishing. The Design template is different from the Published template.  While both have the .XSN extension, the published template contains all the “package” information for the form.  The published form is what is loaded into Central Admin, not the design template. Browser based form integrated into SharePoint team site In Central Admin, under General Settings, select Manage Form Templates.  Upload the published form template and Activate it to a site collection. Now it is available as a content type to select in the form library.  Some documentation on publishing form templates:  Technet – Manage administrator approved form templates And that’s all our base requirements.  Hope this helps to give a good start.

    Read the article

  • Dynamic body implementation

    - by ArturoVM
    I am writing a 2D game where one of the characters has some very particular requirements. This character is a body with no particular shape (similar to a fluid, but not so much), it has to be able to grow and shrink (as in actually growing, not just scaling), and it has to have collision detection (even if it's basic). Because of this requirements, it obviously can't be based on a sprite, so direct rendering of the shape should be the logical thing to do. I assume this is no easy task, but I just couldn't find a good physics engine that covers these requirements (or at least no tutorial on how to do it; I particularly searched for Box2D tutorials). Is there a way of doing this with Box2D, SDL, or any other physics or game engine out there? If not, what's a good place to start? I am really clueless as far as soft-body physics are concerned.

    Read the article

  • Choosing the Right Financial Consolidation and Reporting Solution

    Financial reporting requirements for publicly-held companies are changing and getting more complex. With the upcoming convergence of US GAAP and IFRS, demand for more detailed non-financial disclosures, and the SEC mandate for XBRL financial executives are under pressure to ensure they have the right systems in place to support current and future reporting requirements. Tune into this conversation with Rich Clayton, VP of Enterprise Performance Management and BI products for Oracle, and Annette Melatti, Senior Director of Product Marketing for Financial Applications to learn about the latest market requirements, what capabilities are provided by Oracle's General Ledgers, and how customers can extend their investment in Oracle General Ledger solutions with Oracle's market-leading financial close and reporting products.

    Read the article

  • What zoomable image viewers are there for websites?

    - by tog22
    What zoomable image viewers are there? By these I mean tools that one can embed in a website to let a user zoom in on and pan around a high res image, a canonical example being http://www.zoomify.com/ (see the demo on their home page). Comments on them are welcome. I'm personally looking for something simple and cheap/free which ideally doesn't require Flash, and will accept the answer that comes closest to these requirements. But others who find this question may have different requirements, so all suggestions will be helpful. I have of course searched; I've found Zoomify, http://www.openzoom.org/ and http://code.google.com/p/galapix/ but none seem to meet my requirements, though I could be wrong and others may have more expert comments on these.

    Read the article

  • Web App vs Portal Platform - convincing the customer

    - by shinynewbike
    We're evaluating a set of requirements for a customer who wants Liferay which mainly has AAA and Web CMS requirements, and allowing user to upload their own content. Also all inetgration is via web services. However there is no need for other features such as actual "portlets", i18n, mashups, skins, themes, tagging, social presence, no collaboration etc So we feel we can do this as a standard JEE web app and not use Liferay (or any other portal product) since these are overheads we dont need. The customer feels the Web CMS requirements + user upload justify the "portal" product. Can anyone help me with some points to convince the customer? Assuming our point of view is right.

    Read the article

  • Very original V&V explanation (Bohm) - I cannot understand its point

    - by user970696
    Hopefully my last thread about V&V as I found the B.Boehm is text which I just do not understand well (likely my technical English is not that good). http://csse.usc.edu/csse/TECHRPTS/1979/usccse79-501/usccse79-501.pdf Basically he says that verification is about checking that products derived from requirments baseline must correspond to it and that deviation leads only to changes in these derived products (design, code). But he says it begins with design and ends with acceptance tests (you can check the V model inside). The thing is, I have accepted ISO12207 in terms of all testing is validation, yet it does not make any sense here. In order to be sure the product complies with requirements (acceptance test) I need to test it. Also it says that validation problems means that requirements are bad and needs to be changed - which does not happen with testing that testers do, who just checks correspondence with requirements.

    Read the article

  • What are the requirements to consider someone as a Software Engineer? Is it just a job title? [close

    - by mike
    I am employed as a Software Engineer with a background in C# and .NET. I am trying to interface with an web API. I asked for help because I didn't know to connect to it or handle the results. Someone told me that I shouldn't consider myself a Software Engineer because I didn't know to how to do it. They said the API was well documented, required no authentication, and returned XML that I could easily parse. They said the documentation should be enough to figure out how to use the API. Isn't having a job title of Software Engineer the only consideration for being a Software Engineer?

    Read the article

  • fatal error C1034: windows.h: no include path set

    - by nathan
    OS Windows Vista Ultimate trying to run a program called minimal.c when i type at command line C:\Users\nathan\Desktopcl minimal.c Microsoft (R) 32-bit C/C++ Optimizing Compiler Version 14.00.50727.762 for 80x86 Copyright (C) Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. minimal.c minimal.c(5) : fatal error C1034: windows.h: no include path set i have set all the paths: C:\Users\nathan\Desktoppath PATH=C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Visual Studio 8\VC\bin;C:\Windows\system3 ;C:\Windows;C:\Windows\System32\Wbem;C:\Program Files (x86)\ATI Technologies\AT .ACE\Core-Static;C:\Program Files\Intel\DMIX;c:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft S L Server\100\Tools\Binn\;c:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft SQL Server\100\DTS\Bi n\;C:\Program Files (x86)\QuickTime\QTSystem\;C:\Program Files (x86)\Java\jdk1. .0_13\bin;C:\Program Files (x86)\Autodesk\Backburner\;C:\Program Files (x86)\Co mon Files\Autodesk Shared\;C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft DirectX SDK (March 009)\Include;C:\Users\nathan\Desktop\glut-3.7.6-bin\glut-3.7.6-bin;C:\Program F les (x86)\Microsoft Visual Studio 8\Common7\IDE;C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsof Visual Studio 8\VC\PlatformSDK\Include;C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Visual Studio 8\VC\PlatformSDK\Include\gl i have gone and made sure windows.h is in the directory im setting the path too. its in C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Visual Studio 8\VC\PlatformSDK\Include. i have visual studio 2005 i have exhausted all possiblies any ideas

    Read the article

  • Windows Azure Use Case: Agility

    - by BuckWoody
    This is one in a series of posts on when and where to use a distributed architecture design in your organization's computing needs. You can find the main post here: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/buckwoody/archive/2011/01/18/windows-azure-and-sql-azure-use-cases.aspx  Description: Agility in this context is defined as the ability to quickly develop and deploy an application. In theory, the speed at which your organization can develop and deploy an application on available hardware is identical to what you could deploy in a distributed environment. But in practice, this is not always the case. Having an option to use a distributed environment can be much faster for the deployment and even the development process. Implementation: When an organization designs code, they are essentially becoming a Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) provider to their own organization. To do that, the IT operations team becomes the Infrastructure-as-a-Service (IaaS) to the development teams. From there, the software is developed and deployed using an Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) process. A simplified view of an ALM process is as follows: Requirements Analysis Design and Development Implementation Testing Deployment to Production Maintenance In an on-premise environment, this often equates to the following process map: Requirements Business requirements formed by Business Analysts, Developers and Data Professionals. Analysis Feasibility studies, including physical plant, security, manpower and other resources. Request is placed on the work task list if approved. Design and Development Code written according to organization’s chosen methodology, either on-premise or to multiple development teams on and off premise. Implementation Code checked into main branch. Code forked as needed. Testing Code deployed to on-premise Testing servers. If no server capacity available, more resources procured through standard budgeting and ordering processes. Manual and automated functional, load, security, etc. performed. Deployment to Production Server team involved to select platform and environments with available capacity. If no server capacity available, standard budgeting and procurement process followed. If no server capacity available, systems built, configured and put under standard organizational IT control. Systems configured for proper operating systems, patches, security and virus scans. System maintenance, HA/DR, backups and recovery plans configured and put into place. Maintenance Code changes evaluated and altered according to need. In a distributed computing environment like Windows Azure, the process maps a bit differently: Requirements Business requirements formed by Business Analysts, Developers and Data Professionals. Analysis Feasibility studies, including budget, security, manpower and other resources. Request is placed on the work task list if approved. Design and Development Code written according to organization’s chosen methodology, either on-premise or to multiple development teams on and off premise. Implementation Code checked into main branch. Code forked as needed. Testing Code deployed to Azure. Manual and automated functional, load, security, etc. performed. Deployment to Production Code deployed to Azure. Point in time backup and recovery plans configured and put into place.(HA/DR and automated backups already present in Azure fabric) Maintenance Code changes evaluated and altered according to need. This means that several steps can be removed or expedited. It also means that the business function requesting the application can be held directly responsible for the funding of that request, speeding the process further since the IT budgeting process may not be involved in the Azure scenario. An additional benefit is the “Azure Marketplace”, In effect this becomes an app store for Enterprises to select pre-defined code and data applications to mesh or bolt-in to their current code, possibly saving development time. Resources: Whitepaper download- What is ALM?  http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=9743693  Whitepaper download - ALM and Business Strategy: http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=9743690  LiveMeeting Recording on ALM and Windows Azure (registration required, but free): http://www.microsoft.com/uk/msdn/visualstudio/contact-us.aspx?sbj=Developing with Windows Azure (ALM perspective) - 10:00-11:00 - 19th Jan 2011

    Read the article

  • Software Architecture verses Software Design

    Recently, I was asked what the differences between software architecture and software design are. At a very superficial level both architecture and design seem to mean relatively the same thing. However, if we examine both of these terms further we will find that they are in fact very different due to the level of details they encompass. Software Architecture can be defined as the essence of an application because it deals with high level concepts that do not include any details as to how they will be implemented. To me this gives stakeholders a view of a system or application as if someone was viewing the earth from outer space. At this distance only very basic elements of the earth can be detected like land, weather and water. As the viewer comes closer to earth the details in this view start to become more defined. Details about the earth’s surface will start to actually take form as well as mane made structures will be detected. The process of transitioning a view from outer space to inside our earth’s atmosphere is similar to how an architectural concept is transformed to an architectural design. From this vantage point stakeholders can start to see buildings and other structures as if they were looking out of a small plane window. This distance is still high enough to see a large area of the earth’s surface while still being able to see some details about the surface. This viewing point is very similar to the actual design process of an application in that it takes the very high level architectural concept or concepts and applies concrete design details to form a software design that encompasses the actual implementation details in the form of responsibilities and functions. Examples of these details include: interfaces, components, data, and connections. In review, software architecture deals with high level concepts without regard to any implementation details. Software design on the other hand takes high level concepts and applies concrete details so that software can be implemented. As part of the transition between software architecture to the creation of software design an evaluation on the architecture is recommended. There are several benefits to including this step as part of the transition process. It allows for projects to ensure that they are on the correct path as to meeting the stakeholder’s requirement goals, identifies possible cost savings and can be used to find missing or nonspecific requirements that cause ambiguity in a design. In the book “Evaluating Software Architectures: Methods and Case Studies”, they define key benefits to adding an architectural review process to ensure that an architecture is ready to move on to the design phase. Benefits to evaluating software architecture: Gathers all stakeholders to communicate about the project Goals are clearly defined in regards to the creation or validation of specific requirements Goals are prioritized so that when conflicts occur decisions will be made based on goal priority Defines a clear expectation of the architecture so that all stakeholders have a keen understanding of the project Ensures high quality documentation of the architecture Enables discoveries of architectural reuse  Increases the quality of architecture practices. I can remember a few projects that I worked on that could have really used an architectural review prior to being passed on to developers. This project was to create some new advertising space on the company’s website in order to sell space based on the location and some other criteria. I was one of the developer selected to lead this project and I was given a high level design concept and a long list of ever changing requirements due to the fact that sales department had no clear direction as to what exactly the project was going to do or how they were going to bill the clients once they actually agreed to purchase the Ad space. In my personal opinion IT should have pushed back to have the requirements further articulated instead of forcing programmers to code blindly attempting to build such an ambiguous project.  Unfortunately, we had to suffer with this project for about 4 months when it should have only taken 1.5 to complete due to the constantly changing and unclear requirements. References  Clements, P., Kazman, R., & Klein, M. (2002). Evaluating Software Architectures. Westford, Massachusetts: Courier Westford. 

    Read the article

  • Organizational characteristics that impact the selection of Development Methodology concepts applied to a project

    Based on my experience, no one really follows a specific methodology exactly as it is formally designed. In fact, the key concepts of a few methodologies are usually combined to form a hybrid methodology for each project based on the current organizational makeup and the project need/requirements to be accomplished. Organizational characteristics that impact the selection of methodology concepts applied to a project. Prior subject knowledge pertaining to a project can be critical when deciding on what methodology or combination of methodologies to apply to a project. For example, if a project is very straight forward, and the development staff has experience in developing  that are similar, then the waterfall method could possibly be the best choice because little to no research is needed  in order to complete the project tasks and there is very little need for changes to occur.  On the other hand, if the development staff has limited subject knowledge or the requirements/specification of the project could possibly change as the project progresses then the use of spiral, iterative, incremental, agile, or any combination would be preferred. The previous methodologies used by an organization typically do not change much from project to project unless the needs of a project dictate differently. For example, if the waterfall method is the preferred development methodology then most projects will be developed by the waterfall method. Depending on the time allotted to a project each day can impact the selection of a development methodology. In one example, if the staff can only devote a few hours a day to a project then the incremental methodology might be ideal because modules can be added to the final project as they are developed. On the other hand, if daily time allocation is not an issue, then a multitude of methodologies could work well for a project. Project characteristics that impact the selection of methodology concepts applied to a project. The type of project being developed can often dictate the type of methodology used for the project. Based on my experience, projects that tend to have a lot of user interaction, follow a more iterative, incremental, or agile approach typically using a prototype that develops into a final project. These methodologies desire back and forth communication between users, clients, and developers to allow for requirements to change and functionality to be enhanced. Conversely, limited interaction applications or automated services can still sometimes get away with using the waterfall or transactional approach. The timeline of a project can also force an organization to prefer a particular methodology over the rest. For instance, if the project must be completed within 24 hours, then there is very little time for discussions back and forth between clients, users and the development team. In this scenario, the waterfall method would be perfect because the only interaction with the client occurs prior to a development project to outline the system requirements, and the development team can quickly move through the software development stages in order to complete the project within the deadline. If the team had more time, then the other methodologies could also be considered because there is more time for client and users to review the project and make changes as they see fit, and/or allow for more time to review the project in order to enhance the business performance and functionality. Sometimes the client and or user involvement can dictate the selection of methodologies applied to a project. One example of this is if a client is highly motivated to get a project completed and desires to play an active part in the development process then the agile development approach would work perfectly with this client because it allows for frequent interaction between clients, users and the development team. The inverse of this situation is a client that just wants to provide the project requirements and only wants to get involved when the project is to be delivered. In this case the waterfall method would work well because there is no room for changes and no back and forth between the users, clients or the development team.

    Read the article

  • InfoPath 2010 Form Design and Web Part Deployment

    - by JKenderdine
    In January I had the pleasure to speak at SharePoint Saturday Virginia Beach.  I presented a session on InfoPath 2010 forms design which included some of the basics of Forms Design, description of some of the new options with InfoPath 2010 and SharePoint 2010, and other integration possibilities.  Included below is the information presented as well as the solution to create the demo: First thing you need to understand is what the difference is between an InfoPath List form and a Form Library Form?  SharePoint List Forms:  Store data directly in a SharePoint list.  Each control (e.g. text box) in the form is bound to a column in the list. SharePoint list forms are directly connected to the list, which means that you don’t have to worry about setting up the publish and submit locations. You also do not have the option for back-end code. Form Library Forms:  Store data in XML files in a SharePoint form library.  This means they are more flexible and you can do more with them.  For example, they can be configured to save drafts and submit to different locations. However, they are more complex to work with and require more decisions to be made during configuration.  You do have the option of back-end code with these type of forms. Next steps: You need to create your File Architecture Plan.  Plan the location for the saved template – both Test and Production (This is pretty much a given, but just in case - Always make sure to have a test environment) Plan for the location of the published template Then you need to document your Form Template Design Plan.  Some questions to ask to gather your requirements: What will the form be designed to do? Will it gather user information? Will it display data from a data source? Do we need to show different views to different users? What do we base this on? How will it be implemented for the users? Browser or Client based form Site collection content type – Published through Central Admin Form Library – Published directly to form library So what are the requirements for this template?  Business Card Request Form Template Design Plan Gather user information and requirements for card Pull in as much user information as possible. Use data from the user profile web services as a data source Show and hide fields as necessary for requirements Create multiple views – one for those submitting the form and another view for the executive assistants placing the orders. Browser based form integrated into SharePoint team site Published directly to form library The form was published through Central Administration and incorporated into the site as a content type. Utilizing the new InfoPath Web part, the form is integrated into the page and the users can complete the form directly from within that page. For now, if you are interested in the final form XSN, contact me using the Contact link above.   I will post soon with the details on how the form was created and how it integrated the requirements detailed above.

    Read the article

  • Retrofit Certification

    - by Bill Evjen
    Impact of Regulations on Cabin Systems Installation John Courtright, Structural Integrity Engineering There are “heightened” FAA attention to technical issues related to IFE and Wi-Fi Systems Installations The Aging Aircraft Safety Rule – EWIS & Damage Tolerance Analysis The Challenge: Maximize Flight Safety While Minimizing Costs Issue Papers & Testing, Testing, Testing The role of Airworthiness Directives (ADs) on the design of many IFE systems and all antenna systems. Goal is safety AND cost-effective maintenance intervals and inspection techniques The STC Process Briefly Stated Type Certifications (TC) Supplemental Type Certifications (STC) The STC Process Project Specific Certification Plan (PSCP) Managed by FAA Aircraft Certification Office (ACO) Type of Project (Electrical/Mechanical Systems or Structural) Specific Type of Aircraft Being Modified Schedule Design & Installation Location What does the STC Plan (PSCP) Cover? System Description – What does the system do? System qualification – Are the components qualified? Certification requirements – What FARs are applicable? Installation detail – what is being modified? Prototype installation – What is new? Functional hazard Assessment (FHA) – is it safe? EZAP-EWIS Requirements – Any aging aircraft issues? Certification Data – How is compliance achieved? Delegation and FAA involvement – Who is doing the work? Proposed certification schedule – When is the installation? Certification documentation – What the FAA Expects to see Cabin Systems Certification Concerns In addition to meeting the requirements for DO-160, Cabin System Certification needs to address issues related to: Power management: Generally, IFE and Wi-Fi Systems are classified as “Non-Essential Equipment” from a certification viewpoint. Connected to “non-essential” power buses Must be able to shed IFE & Wi-Fi Systems in a smoke/fire event or Other electrical emergency (FAA Policy 00-111-160) FAA is more relaxed with testing wi-fi. It used to be that you had to have 150 seats with laptops running wi-fi, but now it is down to around 50. Aging aircraft concerns – electrical and structural Issue papers addressing technical concerns involving: “Structural Certification Criteria for Large Antenna Installations” Antenna “Vibration/Buffeting Compliance Criteria” DO-160 : Environmental Test Procedures DO 160 – “Environmental Conditions and Test Procedures for Airborne Equipment”, Issued by RTCA Provides guidance to equipment manufacturers as to testing requirements Temperature: –40C to +55C Vibration and Shock Contaminant susceptibility – fluids and dust Electro-magnetic Interference Cabin systems are generally classified as “non-essential” Swissair 111 crashed (in part) due to non-standard wiring practices. EWIS Design Implications Installation design must take EWIS Requirements into account. This generally means: Aircraft surveys are needed to identify proper wire routing Ensure existing wiring diagrams are correct Identify primary/Secondary/Tertiary bus locations Verify proper separation of wire bundles exist Required separation from fuel quantity indicator system (FQIS) to prevent fuel tang ignition Enhanced Zonal Analysis Procedure (EZAP) Performed EZAP was developed by the Aging Transport Systems Rulemaking Advisory Committee (ATSRAC) EZAP is the method for analyzing airplane zones with an emphasis on evaluating wiring systems and the existence of combustibles  in the cabin. Certification Considerations for Wi-Fi Systems Electrical – All existing DO 160 testing required Issue papers required Onboard EMI testing – any interference with aircraft systems when multiple wi-fi users are logged on? Vibration/Buffeting compliance criteria – what is the effect of the antenna on aircraft flight characteristics? Structural certification criteria – what are the stress loads on the aircraft at the antenna location and what is the impact on maintenance inspection criteria for the airline? Damage tolerance analysis required Goal – minimize maintenance inspection intervals

    Read the article

  • When should I use a Process Model versus a Use Case?

    - by Dave Burke
    This Blog entry is a follow on to https://blogs.oracle.com/oum/entry/oum_is_business_process_and and addresses a question I sometimes get asked…..i.e. “when I am gathering requirements on a Project, should I use a Process Modeling approach, or should I use a Use Case approach?” Not surprisingly, the short answer is “it depends”! Let’s take a scenario where you are working on a Sales Force Automation project. We’ll call the process that is being implemented “Lead-to-Order”. I would typically think of this type of project as being “Process Centric”. In other words, the focus will be on orchestrating a series of human and system related tasks that ultimately deliver value to the business in a cost effective way. Put in even simpler terms……implement an automated pre-sales system. For this type of (Process Centric) project, requirements would typically be gathered through a series of Workshops where the focal point will be on creating, or confirming, the Future-State (To-Be) business process. If pre-defined “best-practice” business process models exist, then of course they could and should be used during the Workshops, but even in their absence, the focus of the Workshops will be to define the optimum series of Tasks, their connections, sequence, and dependencies that will ultimately reflect a business process that meets the needs of the business. Now let’s take another scenario. Assume you are working on a Content Management project that involves automating the creation and management of content for User Manuals, Web Sites, Social Media publications etc. Would you call this type of project “Process Centric”?.......well you could, but it might also fall into the category of complex configuration, plus some custom extensions to a standard software application (COTS). For this type of project it would certainly be worth considering using a Use Case approach in order to 1) understand the requirements, and 2) to capture the functional requirements of the custom extensions. At this point you might be asking “why couldn’t I use a Process Modeling approach for my Content Management project?” Well, of course you could, but you just need to think about which approach is the most effective. Start by analyzing the types of Tasks that will eventually be automated by the system, for example: Best Suited To? Task Name Process Model Use Case Notes Manage outbound calls Ö A series of linked human and system tasks for calling and following up with prospects Manage content revision Ö Updating the content on a website Update User Preferences Ö Updating a users display preferences Assign Lead Ö Reviewing a lead, then assigning it to a sales person Convert Lead to Quote Ö Updating the status of a lead, and then converting it to a sales order As you can see, it’s not an exact science, and either approach is viable for the Tasks listed above. However, where you have a series of interconnected Tasks or Activities, than when combined, deliver value to the business, then that would be a good indicator to lead with a Process Modeling approach. On the other hand, when the Tasks or Activities in question are more isolated and/or do not cross traditional departmental boundaries, then a Use Case approach might be worth considering. Now let’s take one final scenario….. As you captured the To-Be Process flows for the Sales Force automation project, you discover a “Gap” in terms of what the client requires, and what the standard COTS application can provide. Let’s assume that the only way forward is to develop a Custom Extension. This would now be a perfect opportunity to document the functional requirements (behind the Gap) using a Use Case approach. After all, we will be developing some new software, and one of the most effective ways to begin the Software Development Lifecycle is to follow a Use Case approach. As always, your comments are most welcome.

    Read the article

  • Pros/Cons of document based database vs relational database

    - by damian
    I've been trying to see if I can accomplish some requirements with a document based database, in this case CouchDB. Two generic requirements: CRUD of entities with some fields which have unique index on it ecommerce web app like eBay (better description here). And I'm begining to think that a Document-based database isn't the best choice to address these requirements. Furthermore, I can´t imagine a use for a Document based database (maybe my imagination is too little). Can you explain me if I am asking pears to an elm when I try to use a Document based database for this requirements?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28  | Next Page >