Search Results

Search found 1228 results on 50 pages for 'agile plm'.

Page 22/50 | < Previous Page | 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29  | Next Page >

  • A more flexible and agile compiled language - possible?

    - by sdudo
    I have a short question that I have been thinking about for some time now so why shouldn't I ask it here on SO: Is it theoretically possible to create a compiled, yet more agile, flexible and rapid-development-friendly language? If so: Where would be the pros and cons? Why isn't there one yet?

    Read the article

  • Transformation of Product Management in Telecommunications for Rapid Launch of Next Generation Products

    - by raul.goycoolea
    @font-face { font-family: "Arial"; }@font-face { font-family: "Courier New"; }@font-face { font-family: "Wingdings"; }@font-face { font-family: "Cambria"; }p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal { margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman"; }a:link, span.MsoHyperlink { color: blue; text-decoration: underline; }a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed { color: purple; text-decoration: underline; }p.MsoListParagraph, li.MsoListParagraph, div.MsoListParagraph { margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman"; }p.MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst, li.MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst, div.MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst { margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman"; }p.MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle, li.MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle, div.MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle { margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman"; }p.MsoListParagraphCxSpLast, li.MsoListParagraphCxSpLast, div.MsoListParagraphCxSpLast { margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 36pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman"; }div.Section1 { page: Section1; }ol { margin-bottom: 0cm; }ul { margin-bottom: 0cm; } The Telecom industry continues to evolve through disruptive products, uncertain markets, shorter product lifecycles and convergence of technologies. Today’s market has moved from network centric to consumer centric and focuses primarily on the customer experience. It has resulted in several product management challenges such as an increased complexity and volume of offerings, creating product variants, accelerating time-to-market, ability to provide multiple product views for varied stakeholders, leveraging OSS intelligence to BSS layer, product co-creation and increasing audit and security concerns for service providers. The document discusses how enterprise product management enabled by PLM-based product catalogue solutions helps to launch next generation products rapidly in the context of the Telecommunication Industry.   1.0.       Introduction   Figure 1: Business Scenario   Modern business demands the launch of complex products in a very short timeframe and effecting changes in the price plan faster without IT intervention. One of the key transformation initiatives companies are focusing on is in the area of product management transformation and operational efficiency improvement. As part of these initiatives, companies are investing in best- in-class COTs-based Product Management solutions developed on industry-wide standards.   The new COTs packages are planned to integrate with existing or new B/OSS systems to provide a strategic end-to-end agile solution for reduced time-to-market and order journey time. In addition, system rationalization is being undertaken to phase out legacy systems and migrate to strategic systems.   2.0.       An Overview of Product Management in Telecom   Product data in telecom is multi- dimensional and difficult to manage. It increased significantly due to the complexity of the product, product offerings on the converged network, increased volume of offerings, bundled offering structures and ever increasing regulatory requirements.   In addition, the shrinking product lifecycle in telecom makes it difficult to manage the dynamic product data. Mergers and acquisitions coupled with organic growth pose major challenges in product portfolio management. It is a roadblock in the journey towards becoming an agile organization.       Figure 2: Complexity in Product Management   Network Technology’ is the new dimension in telecom product management where the same products are realized through different networks i.e., Soiled network to Converged network. Consequently, the product solution is different.     Figure 3: Current Scenario - Pain Points in Product Management   The major business implications arising out of the current scenario are slow time-to-market and an inefficient process that affects innovation.   3.0. Transformation of Next Generation Product Management   Companies must focus on their Product Management Transformation Journey in the areas of:   ·       Management of single truth of product information across the organization/geographies which is currently managed in heterogeneous systems   ·       Management of the Intellectual Property (IP) on the product concept and partnership in the design of discrete components to integrate into the system   ·       Leveraging structured and unstructured product data within the extended enterprise to extract consumer insights and drive innovation   ·       Management of effective operational separation to comply with regulatory bodies   ·       Reuse of existing designs and add relevant features such as value-added services to enable effective product bundling     Figure 4: Next generation needs   PLM-based Enterprise Product Catalogue solutions efficiently address the above requirements and act as an enabler towards product management transformation and rapid product launch.   4.0. PLM-based Enterprise Product Management     Figure 5: PLM-based Enterprise Product Mastering   Enterprise Product Management (EPM) enables the business to manage complex product attributes of data in complex environments. Product Mastering helps create a 'single view' of the product by creating a business-driven, IT-supported environment where a global 'single truth record' is created, managed and reused.   4.1 The Business Case for Telco PLM-based solutions for Enterprise Product Management   ·       Telco PLM-based Product Mastering solutions provide a centralized authoring environment for product definition and control of all product data and rules   ·       PLM packages are designed to support multiple perspectives of product data (ordering perspective, billing perspective, provisioning perspective)   ·       Maintains relationships/links between different elements of the entire product definition   ·       Telco PLM packages are specialized in next generation lifecycle management requirements of products such as revision and state management, test and release management, role management and impact analysis)   ·       Takes into consideration all aspects of OSS product requirements compared to CRM product catalogue solutions where the product data managed is mostly order oriented and transactional     ·       New breed of Telco PLM packages are designed with 'open' standards such as SID and eTOM. They are interoperable, support integration frameworks such as subscription and notification.   ·       Telco PLM packages have developed good collaboration frameworks to integrate suppliers and partners into the product development value chain   4.2 Various Architectures/Approaches for Product Mastering using Telco PLM systems   4. 2.a Single Central Product Management (Mastering) Approach   Figure 6: Single Central Product Management (Master) Approach       This approach is implemented across verticals such as aerospace and automotive. It focuses on a physically centralized product master to which other sources are dependent on. The product definition data (Product bundles, service bundles, price plans, offers and discounts, product configuration rules and market campaigns) is created and maintained physically in a centralized environment. In addition, the product definition/authoring environment is centralized. The existing legacy product definition data available in CRM product catalogue, billing catalogue and the legacy product catalogue is migrated to the centralized PLM-based Enterprise Product Management solution.   Architectural changes must be made in the existing business landscape of applications to create and revise data because the applications have to refer to the central repository for approvals and validation of product configurations. It is achieved by modifying how the applications write data or how the applications can be adapted to use the rules to be managed and published.   Complete product configuration validation will be done in enterprise / central product catalogue and final configuration will be sent to the B/OSS system through the SOA compliant product distribution architecture. The approach/architecture enables greater control in terms of product data management and product data governance.   4.2.b Federated Product Management (Mastering) Architecture     Figure 7: Federated Product Management (Mastering) Architecture   In the federated product mastering approach, the basic unique product definition data (product id, description product hierarchy, basic price plans and simple product design rules) will be centrally created and will be maintained. And, the advanced product definition (Product bundling, promotions, offers & discount plans) will be created in respective down stream OSS systems. The advanced product definition (Product bundling, promotions, offers and discount plans) will be created in respective downstream OSS systems.   For example, basic product definitions such as attributes, product hierarchy and basic price plans will be created and maintained in Enterprise/Central product reference catalogue and distributed to downstream OSS systems. Respective downstream OSS systems build product bundles, promotions, advanced price plans over the basic product definition and master the advanced product definition. Central reference database accesses the respective other source product master data and assembles a point-in-time consolidated view of the product. The approach is typically adapted in some merger and acquisition scenarios where there is a low probability of a central physical authority managing the data. In addition, the migration effort in this case is minimal and there are no big architectural changes to the organization application landscape. However, this approach will not result in better product data management and data governance.   5.0 Customer Scenario – Before EPC deployment   A leading global telecommunications service provider wanted to launch a quad play and triple play service offering in the shortest possible lead time. The service provider was offering Broadband and VoIP services to customers. The company wanted to reuse a majority of the Broadband services and price plans and bundle them with new wireless and IPTV services for quad play and triple play. The challenges in launching the new service offerings were:       Figure 8: Triple Play Plan   ·       Broadband product data was stored in multiple product catalogues (CRM catalogue, Billing catalogue, spread sheets)   ·       Product managers spent a lot of time performing tasks involving duplication or re-keying of data. Manual effort caused errors, cost and time over-runs.   ·       No effective product and price data governance mechanism. Price change issues arising from the lack of data consistency across systems resulted in leakage of customer value and revenue.   ·       Product data had re-usability issues and was not in a structured format. It resulted in uncontrolled product portfolio creation and product management issues.   ·       Lack of enterprise product model resulted into product distribution challenges and thus delays in product launch.   ·       Designers are constrained by existing legacy product management solutions to model product/service requirements and product configuration rules such as upgrading, downgrading and cross selling.    5.1 Customer Scenario - After EPC deployment     Figure 9: SOA-based end-to-end EPC Solution   The company deployed PLM-based Enterprise Product Catalogue solutions to launch quad play service after evaluating various product catalogues. The broadband product offering, service and price data were migrated to the new system, and the product and price plan hierarchy for new offerings were created using the entities defined in the Enterprise Product Model. Supplier product catalogue data such as routers and set up boxes were loaded onto the new solution through SOA-based web service. Price plans and configuration rules were built in the new system. The validated final product configurations were extracted from the product catalogue in a SID format and were distributed to the downstream B/OSS systems through exposed SOA-based web services. The transformations required for the B/OSS system were handled using the transformation layer as part of the solution.   6.0 How PLM enabled Product Management Transformation         Figure 10: Product Management Transformation     PLM-based Product Catalogue Solution helped the customer reduce the product launch cycle time by 30% and enable transformation of Product Management for next generation services.   7.0 Conclusion   On the one hand, the telecom industry is undergoing changes due to disruptions, uncertain product markets and increased complexity of products. On the other hand, the ARPU is decreasing year-on-year. Communications Service Providers are embarking on convergence, bundled service offerings, flexibility to cross-sell and up-sell, introduce new value-added services, leverage Web 2.0 concepts and network capabilities. Consequently, large scale IT transformation initiatives to improve their ARPU supporting network and business transformations are a business imperative. Product Management has become a focus area. Companies are investing in best-in- class COTS solutions to reduce time-to-market, ensure rapid service delivery and improve operational efficiency. An efficient PLM-based enterprise product mastering solution plays a key role in achieving zero touch automation and rapid product launch.   References:   1.     Preston G.Smith, Donald G.Reineristsem, Van Nostrand Reinhold “Developing Products in Half the time”.   2.     John G. Innes, "Achieving Successful Product Change", Pitman Publishing.   3.     D T Pham and R M Setchi (16th Jan, 2001) "Authoring environment for documentation development" University of Wales Cardiff, U.K., Proceedings on Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Vol. 215, Part B.   4.     Oracle Product Hub for Communications:   http://www.oracle.com/us/products/applications/master-data-management/product-hub-082059.html  

    Read the article

  • « Le TDD est mort » pour le créateur de Ruby on rails, une position qui divise la communauté agile

    Le TDD est mort ? Non, pas vraiment, peut-être que oui La communauté agile taraudée par un débat autour du TDD« Le TDD est mort ? Ou pas ? » Telle est la question qui taraude l'esprit de la communauté agile en ce moment, vu l'importance du TDD (Test Driven Development ? Développement piloté par les tests) dans l'une des méthodes agiles les plus réputées : la méthode XP.À l'origine de ce débat houleux, David Heinemeier Hansson (DHH) auteur de Ruby on rails et fondateur du Basecamp et ses deux posts...

    Read the article

  • Le département américain de la défense adopte agile et la méthode Scrum, sous les conseils de Jeff Sutherland, inventeur de Scrum

    Le département américain de la défense adopte agile et la méthode Scrum Sous les conseils de Jeff Sutherland inventeur de ScrumAgile séduit de plus en plus de professionnels de l'IT, après son adoption par Microsoft c'est au tour du puissant département américain de la défense (DoD), qui passera d'un modèle en cascade à un modèle agile basé sur la méthode Scrum, sous les conseils avisés du docteur Jeff Sutherland, inventeur de la méthode et actuel PDG de Scrum Inc.A l'origine de cette initiative,...

    Read the article

  • Recommendations for project management software for Scrum

    - by Mendokusai
    We're using Scrum on our current project and we're very happy using our agile board and cards but reporting, burndown charts etc. are somewhat cumbersome to maintain. So, we're looking for good agile software to use instead. I'm keeping requirements deliberately vague but does anyone have any recommendations? The software would need to run on Windows.

    Read the article

  • Agile web development with rails

    - by Steve
    Hi.. This code is from the agile web development with rails book.. I don't understand this part of the code... User is a model which has name,hashed_password,salt as its fields. But in the code they are mentioning about password and password confirmation, while there are no such fields in the model. Model has only hashed_password. I am sure mistake is with me. Please clear this for me :) User Model has name,hashed_password,salt. All the fields are strings require 'digest/sha1' class User < ActiveRecord::Base validates_presence_of :name validates_uniqueness_of :name attr_accessor :password_confirmation validates_confirmation_of :password validate :password_non_blank def self.authenticate(name, password) user = self.find_by_name(name) if user expected_password = encrypted_password(password, user.salt) if user.hashed_password != expected_password user = nil end end user end def password @password end def password=(pwd) @password = pwd return if pwd.blank? create_new_salt self.hashed_password = User.encrypted_password(self.password, self.salt) end private def password_non_blank errors.add(:password,"Missing password")if hashed_password.blank? end def create_new_salt self.salt = self.object_id.to_s + rand.to_s end def self.encrypted_password(password, salt) string_to_hash = password + "wibble" + salt Digest::SHA1.hexdigest(string_to_hash) end end

    Read the article

  • Agilist, Heal Thyself!

    - by Dylan Smith
    I’ve been meaning to blog about a great experience I had earlier in the year at Prairie Dev Con Calgary.  Myself and Steve Rogalsky did a session that we called “Agilist, Heal Thyself!”.  We used a format that was new to me, but that Steve had seen used at another conference.  What we did was start by asking the audience to give us a list of challenges they had had when adopting agile.  We wrote them all down, then had everybody vote on the most interesting ones.  Then we split into two groups, and each group was assigned one of the agile challenges.  We had 20 minutes to discuss the challenge, and suggest solutions or approaches to improve things.  At the end of the 20 minutes, each of the groups gave a brief summary of their discussion and learning's, then we mixed up the groups and repeated with another 2 challenges. The 2 groups I was part of had some really interesting discussions, and suggestions: Unfinished Stories at the end of Sprints The first agile challenge we tackled, was something that every single Scrum team I have worked with has struggled with.  What happens when you get to the end of a Sprint, and there are some stories that are only partially completed.  The team in question was getting very de-moralized as they felt that every Sprint was a failure as they never had a set of fully completed stories. How do you avoid this? and/or what do you do when it happens? There were 2 pieces of advice that were well received: 1. Try to bring stories to completion before starting new ones.  This is advice I give all my Scrum teams.  If you have a 3-week sprint, what happens all too often is you get to the end of week 2, and a lot of stories are almost done; but almost none are completely done.  This is a Bad Thing.  I encourage the teams I work with to only start a new story as a very last resort.  If you finish your task look at the stories in progress and see if there’s anything you can do to help before moving onto a new story.  In the daily standup, put a focus on seeing what stories got completed yesterday, if a few days go by with none getting completed, be sure this fact is visible to the team and do something about it.  Something I’ve been doing recently is introducing WIP (Work In Progress) limits while using Scrum.  My current team has 2-week sprints, and we usually have about a dozen or stories in a sprint.  We instituted a WIP limit of 4 stories.  If 4 stories have been started but not finished then nobody is allowed to start new stories.  This made it obvious very quickly that our QA tasks were our bottleneck (we have 4 devs, but only 1.5 testers).  The WIP limit forced the developers to start to pickup QA tasks before moving onto the next dev tasks, and we ended our sprints with many more stories completely finished than we did before introducing WIP limits. 2. Rather than using time-boxed sprints, why not just do away with them altogether and go to a continuous flow type approach like KanBan.  Limit WIP to keep things under control, but don’t have a fixed time box at the end of which all tasks are supposed to be done.  This eliminates the problem almost entirely.  At some points in the project (releases) you need to be able to burn down all the half finished stories to get a stable release build, but this probably occurs less often than every sprint, and there are alternative approaches to achieve it using branching strategies rather than forcing your team to try to get to Zero WIP every 2-weeks (e.g. when you are ready for a release, create a new branch for any new stories, but finish all existing stories in the current branch and release it). Trying to Introduce Agile into a team with previous Bad Agile Experiences One of the agile adoption challenges somebody described, was he was in a leadership role on a team he had recently joined – lets call him Dave.  This team was currently very waterfall in their ALM process, but they were about to start on a new green-field project.  Dave wanted to use this new project as an opportunity to do things the “right way”, using an Agile methodology like Scrum, adopting TDD, automated builds, proper branching strategies, etc.  The problem he was facing is everybody else on the team had previously gone through an “Agile Adoption” that was a horrible failure.  Dave blamed this failure on the consultant brought in previously to lead this agile transition, but regardless of the reason, the team had very negative feelings towards agile, and was very resistant to trying it out again.  Dave possibly had the authority to try to force the team to adopt Agile practices, but we all know that doesn’t work very well.  What was Dave to do? Ultimately, the best advice was to question *why* did Dave want to adopt all these various practices. Rather than trying to convince his team that these were the “right way” to run a dev project, and trying to do a Big Bang approach to introducing change.  He would be better served by identifying problems the team currently faces, have a discussion with the team to get everybody to agree that specific problems existed, then have an open discussion about ways to address those problems.  This way Dave could incrementally introduce agile practices, and he doesn’t even need to identify them as “agile” practices if he doesn’t want to.  For example, when we discussed with Dave, he said probably the teams biggest problem was long periods without feedback from users, then finding out too late that the software is not going to meet their needs.  Rather than Dave jumping right to introducing Scrum and all it entails, it would be easier to get buy-in from team if he framed it as a discussion of existing problems, and brainstorming possible solutions.  And possibly most importantly, don’t try to do massive changes all at once with a team that has not bought-into those changes.  Taking an incremental approach has a greater chance of success. I see something similar in my day job all the time too.  Clients who for one reason or another claim to not be fans of agile (or not ready for agile yet).  But then they go on to ask me to help them get shorter feedback cycles, quicker delivery cycles, iterative development processes, etc.  It’s kind of funny at times, sometimes you just need to phrase the suggestions in terms they are using and avoid the word “agile”. PS – I haven’t blogged all that much over the past couple of years, but in an attempt to motivate myself, a few of us have accepted a blogger challenge.  There’s 6 of us who have all put some money into a pool, and the agreement is that we each need to blog at least once every 2-weeks.  The first 2-week period that we miss we’re eliminated.  Last person standing gets the money.  So expect at least one blog post every couple of weeks for the near future (I hope!).  And check out the blogs of the other 5 people in this blogger challenge: Steve Rogalsky: http://winnipegagilist.blogspot.ca Aaron Kowall: http://www.geekswithblogs.net/caffeinatedgeek Tyler Doerkson: http://blog.tylerdoerksen.com David Alpert: http://www.spinthemoose.com Dave White: http://www.agileramblings.com (note: site not available yet.  should be shortly or he owes me some money!)

    Read the article

  • The Enterprise is a Curmudgeon

    - by John K. Hines
    Working in an enterprise environment is a unique challenge.  There's a lot more to software development than developing software.  A project lead or Scrum Master has to manage personalities and intra-team politics, has to manage accomplishing the task at hand while creating the opportunities and a reputation for handling desirable future work, has to create a competent, happy team that actually delivers while being careful not to burn bridges or hurt feelings outside the team.  Which makes me feel surprised to read advice like: " The enterprise should figure out what is likely to work best for itself and try to use it." - Ken Schwaber, The Enterprise and Scrum. The enterprises I have experience with are fundamentally unable to be self-reflective.  It's like asking a Roman gladiator if he'd like to carve out a little space in the arena for some silent meditation.  I'm currently wondering how compatible Scrum is with the top-down hierarchy of life in a large organization.  Specifically, manufacturing-mindset, fixed-release, harmony-valuing large organizations.  Now I understand why Agile can be a better fit for companies without much organizational inertia. Recently I've talked with nearly two dozen software professionals and their managers about Scrum and Agile.  I've become convinced that a developer, team, organization, or enterprise can be Agile without using Scrum.  But I'm not sure about what process would be the best fit, in general, for an enterprise that wants to become Agile.  It's possible I should read more than just the introduction to Ken's book. I do feel prepared to answer some of the questions I had asked in a previous post: How can Agile practices (including but not limited to Scrum) be adopted in situations where the highest-placed managers in a company demand software within extremely aggressive deadlines? Answer: In a very limited capacity at the individual level.  The situation here is that the senior management of this company values any software release more than it values developer well-being, end-user experience, or software quality.  Only if the developing organization is given an immediate refactoring opportunity does this sort of development make sense to a person who values sustainable software.   How can Agile practices be adopted by teams that do not perform a continuous cycle of new development, such as those whose sole purpose is to reproduce and debug customer issues? Answer: It depends.  For Scrum in particular, I don't believe Scrum is meant to manage unpredictable work.  While you can easily adopt XP practices for bug fixing, the project-management aspects of Scrum require some predictability.  My question here was meant toward those who want to apply Scrum to non-development teams.  In some cases it works, in others it does not. How can a team measure if its development efforts are both Agile and employ sound engineering practices? Answer: I'm currently leaning toward measuring these independently.  The Agile Principles are a terrific way to measure if a software team is agile.  Sound engineering practices are those practices which help developers meet the principles.  I think Scrum is being mistakenly applied as an engineering practice when it is essentially a project management practice.  In my opinion, XP and Lean are examples of good engineering practices. How can Agile be explained in an accurate way that describes its benefits to sceptical developers and/or revenue-focused non-developers? Answer: Agile techniques will result in higher-quality, lower-cost software development.  This comes primarily from finding defects earlier in the development cycle.  If there are individual developers who do not want to collaborate, write unit tests, or refactor, then these are simply developers who are either working in an area where adding these techniques will not add value (i.e. they are an expert) or they are a developer who is satisfied with the status quo.  In the first case they should be left alone.  In the second case, the results of Agile should be demonstrated by other developers who are willing to receive recognition for their efforts.  It all comes down to individuals, doesn't it?  If you're working in an organization whose Agile adoption consists exclusively of Scrum, consider ways to form individual Agile teams to demonstrate its benefits.  These can even be virtual teams that span people across org-chart boundaries.  Once you can measure real value, whether it's Scrum, Lean, or something else, people will follow.  Even the curmudgeons.

    Read the article

  • MFS Agile Process Template Work Items

    - by devdept
    Where can I find a practical example on how to use Bug, Risk, Scenario, Task and Quality of Service Requirement work items? On MSDN documentation I found this topic: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb668962.aspx but it is not enough for me to deeply understand when to use one or the other. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Problem with displaying usernames in my flash[:notice] - Agile Web Development With Rails - Chapter

    - by Lee
    I can't figure out what I'm doing wrong here. I can’t seem to get the #{@user.name} to work in my flash[:notice] Everything else works just fine I can add new users, but when I add a new user instead of saying “User John Doe was successfully created”, it says “User #{@user.name} was successfully created.” I'm at this point in the depot app: depot_p/app/controllers/users_controller.rb to work.

    Read the article

  • Agile web development with Rails 4 interface difficulties

    - by Luke Annison
    I've been following along with the examples in the book in making a online catalog and am having a couple of discouraging difficulties in Chapter 8 task C: Catalog display. I have input the code for the stylesheets as instructed but it has created a slightly skewed result as compared to what is shown in the book. Whilst minor and aesthetic in nature its a little shock to my confidence and slightly irritating when trying to carry on through the book. I have too little rep to post a pic, but heres the link: http://s11.postimage.org/3pwlzfiwj/Screen_Shot_2012_10_08_at_22_29_56.png) As you can see the boarder seems a little confused and the image at the top is covering the header text. I've been through the code time and time again but can't seem find out where I've gone wrong. Could anybody give me some clues?

    Read the article

  • My chance to shape our development process/policy

    - by Matt Luongo
    Hey guys, I'm sorry if this is a duplicate, but the question search terms are pretty generic. I work at a small(ish) development firm. I say small, but the company is actually a fair size; however, I'm only the second full-time developer, as most past work has been organized around contractors. I'm in a position to define internal project process and policy- obvious stuff like SCM and unit-testing. Methodology is outside the scope of the document I'm putting together, but I'd really like to push us in a leaner (and maybe even Agile?) direction. I feel like I have plenty of good practice recommendations, but not enough solid motivation to make my document the spirit guide I'd like it to be. I've separated the document into "principles" and "recommendations". Recommendations have been easy to come up with. Use SCM, strive for 1-step, regularly scheduled builds, unit test first, document as you go... Listing the principles that are supposed to be informing these recommendations, though, has been rough. I've come up with "tools work for us; we should never work for tools" and a hazy clause aimed at our QA (which has been overly manual) that I'd like to read "tedium is the root of all evil". I don't want to miss an opportunity with this document to give us a good in-house start and maybe even push us toward Agile. What principles am I missing?

    Read the article

  • is Checkland's approach still relevant today?

    - by WeNeedAnswers
    I remember back in the mid 90's that I came across a systems methodology called Checkland's Approach or sometimes called SSM (Soft Systems Methodology). With the advent of Agile and Extreme Programming, not to mention some of the harder methodologies and methods out there related to Object technologies. Is the use of such a methodology still relevant in today's world?

    Read the article

  • How to do a burndown chart for the whole project in Visual Studio 2010?

    - by Marsharks
    I am very new to using Agile (scrum). we have planned iterations using story points, but have not assigned work (tasks) to all the user stories in the project, just in the iteration coming up. My boss wants to know how much work is left to do...and I don't know because I haven't planned those iterations. Can anyone give me advice or a resource to reference on what I need to do in order to provide him with what he needs?

    Read the article

  • How to obtain flow while pair programming in agile development?

    - by bizso09
    Flow is is concept introduced by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi In short, it means what most to get into the "zone". You feel immeresed in the task you are doing, you are in deep focus and concentration and the task difficulty is just right for you, but challenging at the same time. When people acquire flow their prodctivity shoots up. Programming requires great deal of mental focus and programmers need to juggle several things in their mind at once. Many like to work in a quite environment where they can direct their full attention to the task. If they are interreupted, it may take several minutes, sometimes hours to get back into flow. I understand that agile way of doing software development is called pair prograaming. This is pormoted in Extreme programming too. It means you put the whole software development team in one room so that communication is seamless. You do programming with your pair because this way you get instant code reviews and fix bugs sooner. However, I alwys had problem obtaining flow while doing pair programming because of the contant stream of interrupts. I'm thinking deep about an issue then all of sudden someone asks me a question from another pair. My train of thought is all lost. How can you obtain and keep flow while doing agile pair programming?

    Read the article

  • What tools provide burndown charts to Bugzilla or Mylyn?

    - by Daniel Jomphe
    My team and I need to work on a project whose bugs are filed in Bugzilla, using Mylyn. Do you know of any tool or plug-in that provides scrum-inspired burndown charts to Bugzilla or Mylyn? Hopefully, this tool would be free for commercial usage, but we're not closed to commercial tools. Update: 4 hours of research allowed me to find very few free tools. Looks like bugzilla isn't popular in agile teams! And obviously, it's not the best fit.

    Read the article

  • Documenting user scenarios and measuring/testing

    - by Rimian
    Please forgive me as I don't quite remember the exact terms for what I am talking about... hence my question. Recently I worked on a large Agile team where I encountered a method of defining user scenarios (much like user stories). These scenarios were a few very basic short sentences with keywords and a structure that could be understood by humans (especially project managers) and could also be coded against using some Java Framework (for verifying tests). The exact structure of this mini language used keywords like "when" and "and" or "if" which was how the framework parsed and verified the result. The purpose of this framework was to interface between management and the acceptance testing framework. So essentially management could write the tests themselves using English. The scenario went something like this: "When a user visits URL and User clicks on X Something happens (that can be measured)" Can anyone help me remember exactly what I am talking about? Many thanks

    Read the article

  • Which are the Extreme Programming "core" practices?

    - by MiKo
    Recently, I began reading about agile methodologies and XP in particular. I am a bit confused, though, about what are considered the practices involved in extreme programming. More precisely: Wikipedia reports 12 practices, which I someway believe to be the "classic" ones. Both Kent Beck and Ron Jeffries indicate 13 practices (you can find the links at the bottom of wikipedia page about "Extreme Programming Practices", I cannot post them here since I am new user of Stack Overflow), while this review of Kent Beck's "XP explained" (2nd edition) report more than 20 somewhat different practices. As a complete beginner in the topic (and basically as a complete beginner as a programmer), I would like to be enlightened on the matter. My impression is that I should look at Beck's book, since the second edition has been written after several years of XPerience, but I can find a lot less material based on that.

    Read the article

  • Languages and development methodologies

    - by Carlos
    Having never worked with Ruby on Rails, I looked it up on Wikipedia. It says It is intended to be used with an Agile development methodology that is used by web developers for rapid development. This got me asking how a given language/framework can be more appropriate for given development methodologies. Are there certain languages that are more friendly for pair programming, for instance? Are there language features that make certain methodologies are more appropriate? Are there features that make certain methodologies impossible? My initial reaction is to dismiss the connection (the design process is a business process, which is more dependent on business needs that language features). But I'm an only programmer within the firm, and I'm a partner, so I get to decide the business needs. What do you think? Also, if the SO community finds that certain languages point towards certain methodologies, what methodology is most common for c#, which is what I use most of the time?

    Read the article

  • How to keep my functions (objects/methods) 'lean and mean'

    - by Michel
    Hi, in all (Agile) articles i read about this: keep your code and functions small and easy to test. How should i do this with the 'controller' or 'coordinator' class? In my situation, i have to import data. In the end i have one object who coordinates this, and i was wondering if there is a way of keeping the coordinator lean(er) and mean(er). My coordinator now does the followling (pseudocode) //Write to the log that the import has started Log.StartImport() //Get the data in Excel sheet format result = new Downloader().GetExcelFile() //Log this step Log.LogStep(result ) //convert the data to intern objects result = new Converter().Convertdata(result); //Log this step Log.LogStep(result ) //write the data result = Repository.SaveData(result); //Log this step Log.LogStep(result ) Imho, this is one of those 'know all' classes or at least one being 'not lean and mean'? Or, am i taking this lean and mean thing to far and is it impossible to program an import without some kind of 'fat' importer/coordinator? Michel

    Read the article

  • How to stop Lean programming becoming Cowboy Coding?

    - by Matt Howells
    My team has been progressively adopting more and more lightweight methodologies, moving from Scrum to Lean/Kanban where there is less and less formal process. At some point we will be back to Cowboy Coding; indeed I fear we may already be on the border line. Where can the line be drawn between a very lightweight Lean and Agile process and anarchy? How will we know when we have crossed the line? And how can we prevent ourselves from crossing the line? The question might also be phrased as, 'what processes cannot be safely eliminated in Lean's drive to eliminate waste'?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29  | Next Page >