Search Results

Search found 1880 results on 76 pages for 'tom hines'.

Page 3/76 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Login without running bash_profile or bashrc

    - by Tom Ritter
    So let's say one typoed something in their .bashrc that prevents him (or her) from logging in via ssh (i.e. the ssh login exits because of the error in the file). Is there any way that person could login without executing it (or .bashrc since the one runs the other), or otherwise delete/rename/invalidate the file? Suppose you don't have physical access to the machine, and this is the only user account with the ability to ssh in. For Reference: .bash_profile includes .bashrc: [[ -f ~/.bashrc ]] && . ~/.bashrc Edit: Things I have tried: ssh user@host "rm ~/.bashrc" scp nothing user@host:/RAID/home/tom/.bashrc ssh user@host "/bin/bash --norc" All give the error: /RAID/home/tom/.bashrc: line 16: /usr/local/bin/file: No such file or directory /RAID/home/tom/.bashrc: line 16: exec: /usr/local/bin/file: cannot execute: No such file or directory

    Read the article

  • Can't change current working directory to external drive in Windows

    - by Tom
    I'm trying to run a program located on an external USB disk using the Windows command prompt. I'm running Windows 7 64-bit (running in VMWare Workstation 8.0.) Here's what happens: I plug in the USB disk and it appears as drive letter 'E' in My Computer. I launch cmd from the start menu. I notice the prompt displays C:\Users\Tom> I type cd E:\ I notice the prompt displays C:\Users\Tom> (cd also yields C:\Users\Tom>) I can explore the drive using explorer.exe just fine, and it is connected according to VMWare Workstation. What am I doing wrong?

    Read the article

  • Difference between "machine hardware" and "hardware platform"

    - by Adil
    My Linux machine reports "uname -a" outputs as below:- [root@tom i386]# uname -a Linux tom 2.6.9-89.ELsmp #1 SMP Mon Apr 20 10:34:33 EDT 2009 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux [root@tom i386]# As per man page of uname, the entries "i686 i686 i386" denotes:- machine hardware name (i686) processor type (i686) hardware platform (i386) Additional info: [root@tom i386]# cat /proc/cpuinfo <snip> vendor_id : GenuineIntel cpu family : 6 model : 15 model name : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU 5148 @ 2.33GHz stepping : 6 cpu MHz : 2328.038 cache size : 4096 KB </snip>

    Read the article

  • Concatenate Gridview Data

    - by zahid mahmood
    I have a gridview with following Data CustomerName item qty tom sugar 1 kg Peter Rice 2 Kg Jhone Sugar .5 kg tom Rice 5 Kg Peter Tea .5 Kg tom Tea 1 kg now I want to display data with the following format: tom sugar 1kg, Rice 5 kg, Tea 1 kg Peter Rice 1kg, Tea .5 kg Jhone Sugar .5kg how to achieve this

    Read the article

  • Security Risks of Unsigned ClickOnce Manifests

    - by Tom Tom
    Using signed manifests in ClickOnce deployments, it is not possible to modify files after the deployment package has been published - installation will fail as hash information in the manifest won't match up with the modified files. I recently stumbled upon a situation where this was problematic - customers need to be able to set things like connection strings in app.config before deploying the software to their users. I got round the problem by un-checking the option to "Sign the ClickOnce manifests" in VS2010 and explicitly excluding the app.config file from the list of files to have hashes generated during the publish process. From a related page on MSDN "Unsigned manifests can simplify development and testing of your application. However, unsigned manifests introduce substantial security risks in a production environment. Only consider using unsigned manifests if your ClickOnce application runs on computers within an intranet that is completely isolated from the internet or other sources of malicious code." In my situation, this isn't an immediate problem - the deployment won't be internet-facing. However, I'm curious to learn what the "substantial security risks" of what I've done would be if it was internet-facing (or if things changed and it needed to be in the future). Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • Tender vs. Requirements vs. Solution Design

    - by Tom Tom
    Conventionally, which of the above documents is deemed to hold the most weight when it comes to system acceptance? I recently had a conversation along these lines: It was argued that the initial requirements / tender documentation should be used to determine system acceptance. It was said that the solution design only serves to describe the way in which the system will solve the problem, not the problem it will solve. Furthermore, it was argued that if requirements are missed during solution design, the requirements should be referenced during system acceptance and that if any requirements were missed then the original tender should be referenced. Conversely, I suggested that - while requirements may be based on the original tender - they supersede it once agreed with the stakeholders. Furthermore, during solution design, analysis is performed to address and refine these initial requirements, translating them into a system capable of meeting the actual requirements. Once signed off by the relevant users, this solution design should absolutely represent the requirements (by virtue of the fact that it's designed upon them) but actually supersedes them as the basis for system acceptance. Is one of the above arguments more valid than the other?

    Read the article

  • Session Update from IASA 2010

    - by [email protected]
    Below: Tom Kristensen, senior vice president at Marsh US Consumer, and Roger Soppe, CLU, LUTCF, senior director of insurance strategy, Oracle Insurance. Tom and Roger participated in a panel discussion on policy administration systems this week at IASA 2010. This week was the 82nd Annual IASA Educational Conference & Business Show held in Grapevine, Texas. While attending the conference, I had the pleasure of serving as a panelist in one of many of the outstanding sessions conducted this year. The session - entitled "Achieving Business Agility and Promoting Growth with a Modern Policy Administration System" - included industry experts Steve Forte from OneShield, Mike Sciole of IFG Companies, and Tom Kristensen, senior vice president at Marsh US Consumer. The session was conducted as a panel discussion and focused on how insurers can leverage best practices to mitigate risk while enabling rapid product innovation through a modern policy administration system. The panelists offered insight into business and technical challenges for both Life & Annuity and Property & Casualty carriers. The session had three primary learning objectives: Identifying how replacing a legacy system with a more modern policy administration solution can deliver agility and growth Identifying how processes and system should be re-engineered or replaced in order to improve speed-to-market and product support Uncovering how to leverage best practices to mitigate risk during a migration to a new platform Tom Kristensen, who is an industry veteran with over 20 years of experience, was able was able to offer a unique perspective as a business process outsourcer (BPO). Marsh US Consumer is currently implementing both the Oracle Insurance Policy Administration solution and the Oracle Revenue Management and Billing platform while at the same time implementing a new BPO customer. Tom offered insight on the need to replace their aging systems and Marsh's ability to drive new products and processes with a modern solution. As a best practice, their current project has empowered their business users to play a major role in both the requirements gathering and configuration phases. Tom stated that working with a modern solution has also enabled his organization to use a more agile implementation methodology and get hands-on experience with the software earlier in the project. He also indicated that Marsh was encouraged by how quickly it will be able to implement new products, which is another major advantage of a modern rules-based system. One of the more interesting issues was raised by an audience member who asked, "With all the vendor solutions available in North American and across Europe, what is going to make some of them more successful than others and help ensure their long term success?" Panelist Mike Sciole, IFG Companies suggested that carriers do their due diligence and follow a structured evaluation process focusing on vendors who demonstrate they have the "cash to invest in long term R&D" and evaluate audited annual statements for verification. Other panelists suggested that the vendor space will continue to evolve and those with a strong strategy focused on the insurance industry and a solid roadmap will likely separate themselves from the rest. The session concluded with the panelists offering advice about not being afraid to evaluate new modern systems. While migrating to a new platform can be challenging and is typically only undertaken every 15+ years by carriers, the ability to rapidly deploy and manage new products, create consistent processes to better service customers, and the ability to manage their business more effectively, transparently and securely are well worth the effort. Roger A.Soppe, CLU, LUTCF, is the Senior Director of Insurance Strategy, Oracle Insurance.

    Read the article

  • How to retain secondary hard drive mounts at reboot and keep shares?

    - by Tom
    I'm running Ubuntu 12.04. A second hard drive connected to this computer does not mount when the computer boots. Additionally, I have set up the drive to be shared but the share is not retained, the share is lost after each boot. My main system drive and a removable drive mount OK and shares remain between boots. Additional information follows: D2Linux sda1 is the secondary hard drive L-Freeagent sdc1 is the removeable drive Here is the contents of fstab immediately after booting (D2Linux /dev/sda1 not yet mounted): '# /etc/fstab: static file system information. ' '# ' '# Use 'blkid' to print the universally unique identifier for a ' '# device; this may be used with UUID= as a more robust way to name devices ' '# that works even if disks are added and removed. See fstab(5). ' '# ' '# ' proc /proc proc nodev,noexec,nosuid 0 0 '# / was on /dev/sdb1 during installation ' UUID=43d29a82-66b3-40f3-91ed-735a27a60004 / ext4 errors=remount-ro 0 1 '# swap was on /dev/sdb5 during installation UUID=cf8e3351-11d0-487a-8a6e-e499c2e88a10 none swap sw ' 0 0 Here is the output of mount with all drives mounted (I did not restore the share): /dev/sdb1 on / type ext4 (rw,errors=remount-ro) proc on /proc type proc (rw,noexec,nosuid,nodev) sysfs on /sys type sysfs (rw,noexec,nosuid,nodev) none on /sys/fs/fuse/connections type fusectl (rw) none on /sys/kernel/debug type debugfs (rw) none on /sys/kernel/security type securityfs (rw) udev on /dev type devtmpfs (rw,mode=0755) devpts on /dev/pts type devpts (rw,noexec,nosuid,gid=5,mode=0620) tmpfs on /run type tmpfs (rw,noexec,nosuid,size=10%,mode=0755) none on /run/lock type tmpfs (rw,noexec,nosuid,nodev,size=5242880) none on /run/shm type tmpfs (rw,nosuid,nodev) gvfs-fuse-daemon on /home/tom/.gvfs type fuse.gvfs-fuse-daemon (rw,nosuid,nodev,user=tom) /dev/sdc1 on /media/L-Freeagent type ext4 (rw,nosuid,nodev,uhelper=udisks) /dev/sda1 on /media/D2Linux type ext4 (rw,nosuid,nodev,uhelper=udisks) Thank you!

    Read the article

  • LINQ-To-SQL and Mapping Table Deletions

    - by Jake
    I have a many-to-many relationship between two tables, let's say Friends and Foods. If a friend likes a food I stick a row into the FriendsFoods table, like this: ID Friend Food 1 'Tom' 'Pizza' FriendsFoods has a Primary Key 'ID', and two non-null foreign keys 'Friend' and 'Food' to the 'Friends' and 'Foods' tables, respectively. Now suppose I have a Friend tom .NET object corresponding to 'Tom', and Tom no longer likes pizza (what is wrong with him?) FriendsFoods ff = tblFriendsFoods.Where(x => x.Friend.Name == 'Tom' && x.Food.Name == 'Pizza').Single(); tom.FriendsFoods.Remove(ff); pizza.FriendsFoods.Remove(ff); If I try to SubmitChanges() on the DataContext, I get an exception because it attempts to insert a null into the Friend and Food columns in the FriendsFoods table. I'm sure I can put together some kind of convoluted logic to track changes to the FriendsFoods table, intercept SubmitChanges() calls, etc to try and get this to work the way I want, but is there a nice, clean way to remove a Many-To-Many relationship with LINQ-To-SQL?

    Read the article

  • change default username when ssh to another pc

    - by Tom
    When I ssh between different pcs I can omit my username (tom) and just type ssh pc_name instead of ssh tom@pc_name I like this feature, and have got into the habit of using it. Unfortunately, on one of my computers I went for the user name tommy. Everytime I connect to this computer I forget to write tommy@creative_pc and wonder why my password doesn't work. Is there a way to tell ssh what user name to use when the username is omitted? Edit: Just found the following question that is similar: How to make ssh log in as the right user? It didn't come up on my initial search.

    Read the article

  • excel 2010 search function?

    - by Tom
    can a cell A1:A200 be searched for a "name" then once found, imput the cell location into a formula? such as find "tom"(a1:a200), [found location at cell a22] IF(a22),=IF(MINUTE(Auto_Agent!G27)+(SECOND(Auto_Agent!G27))=0,"",(MINUTE(Auto_Agent!G27)*60+(SECOND(Auto_Agent!G27)))) the problem I'm having is each time I import data names can be in different cell locations depending on who is working that day. example: Agent: Tom 07:59:49 02:31:04 00:00:00 00:42:44 01:33:02 00:00:43 00:02:00 03:09:05 Avg Skillset Talk Time: 00:06:52 07:59:49 02:31:04 00:00:00 00:42:44 01:33:02 00:00:43 00:02:00 03:09:05 () 9/19/2012 Avg Skillset Talk Time: 00:06:52 07:59:49 02:31:04 00:00:00 00:42:44 01:33:02 00:00:43 00:02:00 03:09:05 Agent: Bill 07:59:49 02:31:04 00:00:00 00:42:44 01:33:02 00:00:43 00:02:00 03:09:05 Avg Skillset Talk Time: 00:06:52 07:59:49 02:31:04 00:00:00 00:42:44 01:33:02 00:00:43 00:02:00 03:09:05 () 9/19/2012 Avg Skillset Talk Time: 00:06:52 07:59:49 02:31:04 00:00:00 00:42:44 01:33:02 00:00:43 00:02:00 03:09:05

    Read the article

  • Packing a DBF

    - by Tom Hines
    I thought my days of dealing with DBFs as a "production data" source were over, but HA (no such luck). I recently had to retrieve, modify and replace some data that needed to be delivered in a DBF file. Everything was fine until I realized / remembered the DBF driver does not ACTUALLY delete records from the data source -- it only marks them for deletion.  You are responsible for handling the "chaff" either by using a utility to remove deleted records or by simply ignoring them.  If imported into Excel, the marked-deleted records are ignored, but the file size will reflect the extra content. So, I went hunting for a method to "Pack" the records (removing deleted ones and resizing the DBF file) and eventually ran across the FOXPRO driver at ( http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/vfoxpro/bb190233.aspx ).  Once installed, I changed the DSN in the code to the new one I created in the ODBC Administrator and ran some tests.  Using MSQuery, I simply tested the raw SQL command Pack {tablename} and it WORKED! One really neat thing is the PACK command is used like regular SQL instructions; "Pack {tablename}" is all that is needed. It is necessary, however, to close all connections to the database before issuing the PACK command.    Here is some C# code for a Pack method.         /// <summary>       /// Pack the DBF removing all deleted records       /// </summary>       /// <param name="strTableName">The table to pack</param>       /// <param name="strError">output of any errors</param>       /// <returns>bool (true if no errors)</returns>       public static bool Pack(string strTableName, ref string strError)       {          bool blnRetVal = true;          try          {             OdbcConnectionStringBuilder csbOdbc = new OdbcConnectionStringBuilder()             {                Dsn = "PSAP_FOX_DBF"             };             string strSQL = "pack " + strTableName;             using (OdbcConnection connOdbc = new OdbcConnection(csbOdbc.ToString()))             {                connOdbc.Open();                OdbcCommand cmdOdbc = new OdbcCommand(strSQL, connOdbc);                cmdOdbc.ExecuteNonQuery();                connOdbc.Close();             }          }          catch (Exception exc)          {             blnRetVal = false;             strError = exc.Message;          }          return blnRetVal;       }

    Read the article

  • Packing a DBF

    - by Tom Hines
    I thought my days of dealing with DBFs as a "production data" source were over, but HA (no such luck). I recently had to retrieve, modify and replace some data that needed to be delivered in a DBF file. Everything was fine until I realized / remembered the DBF driver does not ACTUALLY delete records from the data source -- it only marks them for deletion.  You are responsible for handling the "chaff" either by using a utility to remove deleted records or by simply ignoring them.  If imported into Excel, the marked-deleted records are ignored, but the file size will reflect the extra content.  After several rounds of testing CRUD, the output DBF was huge. So, I went hunting for a method to "Pack" the records (removing deleted ones and resizing the DBF file) and eventually ran across the FOXPRO driver at ( http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/vfoxpro/bb190233.aspx ).  Once installed, I changed the DSN in the code to the new one I created in the ODBC Administrator and ran some tests.  Using MSQuery, I simply tested the raw SQL command Pack {tablename} and it WORKED! One really neat thing is the PACK command is used like regular SQL instructions; "Pack {tablename}" is all that is needed. It is necessary, however, to close all connections to the database (and re-open) before issuing the PACK command or you will get the "File is in use" error.    Here is some C# code for a Pack method.         /// <summary>       /// Pack the DBF removing all deleted records       /// </summary>       /// <param name="strTableName">The table to pack</param>       /// <param name="strError">output of any errors</param>       /// <returns>bool (true if no errors)</returns>       public static bool Pack(string strTableName, ref string strError)       {          bool blnRetVal = true;          try          {             OdbcConnectionStringBuilder csbOdbc = new OdbcConnectionStringBuilder()             {                Dsn = "PSAP_FOX_DBF"             };             string strSQL = "pack " + strTableName;             using (OdbcConnection connOdbc = new OdbcConnection(csbOdbc.ToString()))             {                connOdbc.Open();                OdbcCommand cmdOdbc = new OdbcCommand(strSQL, connOdbc);                cmdOdbc.ExecuteNonQuery();                connOdbc.Close();             }          }          catch (Exception exc)          {             blnRetVal = false;             strError = exc.Message;          }          return blnRetVal;       }

    Read the article

  • Change Comes from Within

    - by John K. Hines
    I am in the midst of witnessing a variety of teams moving away from Scrum. Some of them are doing things like replacing Scrum terms with more commonly understood terminology. Mainly they have gone back to using industry standard terms and more traditional processes like the RAPID decision making process. For example: Scrum Master becomes Project Lead. Scrum Team becomes Project Team. Product Owner becomes Stakeholders. I'm actually quite sad to see this happening, but I understand that Scrum is a radical change for most organizations. Teams are slowly but surely moving away from Scrum to a process that non-software engineers can understand and follow. Some could never secure the education or personnel (like a Product Owner) to get the whole team engaged. And many people with decision-making authority do not see the value in Scrum besides task planning and tracking. You see, Scrum cannot be mandated. No one can force a team to be Agile, collaborate, continuously improve, and self-reflect. Agile adoptions must start from a position of mutual trust and willingness to change. And most software teams aren't like that. Here is my personal epiphany from over a year of attempting to promote Agile on a small development team: The desire to embrace Agile methodologies must come from each and every member of the team. If this desire does not exist - if the team is satisfied with its current process, if the team is not motivated to improve, or if the team is afraid of change - the actual demonstration of all the benefits prescribed by Agile and Scrum will take years. I've read some blog posts lately that criticise Scrum for demanding "Big Change Up Front." One's opinion of software methodologies boils down to one's perspective. If you see modern software development as successful, you will advocate for small, incremental changes to how it is done. If you see it as broken, you'll be much more motivated to take risks and try something different. So my question to you is this - is modern software development healthy or in need of dramatic improvement? I can tell you from personal experience that any project that requires exploration, planning, development, stabilisation, and deployment is hard. Trying to make that process better with only a slightly modified approach is a mistake. You will become completely dependent upon the skillset of your team (the only variable you can change). But the difficulty of planned work isn't one of skill. It isn't until you solve the fundamental challenges of communication, collaboration, quality, and efficiency that skill even comes into play. So I advocate for Big Change Up Front. And I advocate for it to happen often until those involved can say, from experience, that it is no longer needed. I hope every engineer has the opportunity to see the benefits of Agile and Scrum on a highly functional team. I'll close with more key learnings that can help with a Scrum adoption: Your leaders must understand Scrum. They must understand software development, its inherent difficulties, and how Scrum helps. If you attempt to adopt Scrum before the understanding is there, your leaders will apply traditional solutions to your problems - often creating more problems. Success should be measured by quality, not revenue. Namely, the value of software to an organization is the revenue it generates minus ongoing support costs. You should identify quality-based metrics that show the effect Agile techniques have on your software. Motivation is everything. I finally understand why so many Agile advocates say you that if you are not on a team using Agile, you should leave and find one. Scrum and especially Agile encompass many elegant solutions to a wide variety of problems. If you are working on a team that has not encountered these problems the the team may never see the value in the solutions.   Having said all that, I'm not giving up on Agile or Scrum. I am convinced it is a better approach for software development. But reality is saying that its adoption is not straightforward and highly subject to disruption. Unless, that is, everyone really, really wants it.

    Read the article

  • The CIO Identity Crisis — Can Cloud and Innovation Fix It?

    - by Dori DiMassimo-Oracle
    Featuring: Tom Fisher, CIO, Oracle Cloud Services Webcast Replay Now Available!   The simple fact is this: the emergence of cloud has fundamentally changed the role of the CIO; making job descriptions obsolete, altering organizational structures and changing the benchmarks of success. In this webcast Tom Fisher discussed how CIOs can effectively make the transition from "keepers of the technology" to "chief innovators" and how a managed cloud solution can help them regain control of this new, multi-sourced environment and all the business insight it brings.  Watch the webcast  and read Tom's white paper "The CIO as Chief Innovation Officer:  How Cloud is Changing the CIO Role"

    Read the article

  • Extension Methods in Dot Net 2.0

    - by Tom Hines
    Not that anyone would still need this, but in case you have a situation where the code MUST be .NET 2.0 compliant and you want to use a cool feature like Extension methods, there is a way.  I saw this article when looking for ways to create extension methods in C++, C# and VB:  http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/cc163317.aspx The author shows a simple  way to declare/define the ExtensionAttribute so it's available to 2.0 .NET code. Please read the article to learn about the when and why and use the content below to learn HOW. In the next post, I'll demonstrate cross-language calling of extension methods. Here is a version of it in C# First, here's the project showing there's no VOODOO included: using System; namespace System.Runtime.CompilerServices {    [       AttributeUsage(          AttributeTargets.Assembly          | AttributeTargets.Class          | AttributeTargets.Method,       AllowMultiple = false, Inherited = false)    ]    class ExtensionAttribute : Attribute{} } namespace TestTwoDotExtensions {    public static class Program    {       public static void DoThingCS(this string str)       {          Console.WriteLine("2.0\t{0:G}\t2.0", str);       }       static void Main(string[] args)       {          "asdf".DoThingCS();       }    } }   Here is the C++ version: // TestTwoDotExtensions_CPP.h #pragma once using namespace System; namespace System {        namespace Runtime {               namespace CompilerServices {               [                      AttributeUsage(                            AttributeTargets::Assembly                             | AttributeTargets::Class                            | AttributeTargets::Method,                      AllowMultiple = false, Inherited = false)               ]               public ref class ExtensionAttribute : Attribute{};               }        } } using namespace System::Runtime::CompilerServices; namespace TestTwoDotExtensions_CPP { public ref class CTestTwoDotExtensions_CPP {    public:            [ExtensionAttribute] // or [Extension]            static void DoThingCPP(String^ str)    {       Console::WriteLine("2.0\t{0:G}\t2.0", str);    } }; }

    Read the article

  • Scrum and Team Consolidation

    - by John K. Hines
    I’m still working my way through one of the more painful team consolidations of my career.  One thing that’s made it hard was my assumption that the use of Agile methods and Scrum would make everything easy.  Take three teams, make all work visible, track it, and presto: An efficient, functioning software development team. What I’ve come to realize is that the primary benefit of Scrum is that Scrum brings teams closer to their customers.  Frequent meetings, short iterations, and phased deployments are all meant to keep the customer in the loop.  It’s true that as teams become proficient with Scrum they tend to become more efficient.  But I don’t think it’s true that Scrum automatically helps people work together. Instead, Scrum can point out when teams aren’t good at working together.   And it really illustrates when teams, especially teams in sustaining mode, are reacting to their customers instead of innovating with them.  At the moment we’ve inherited a huge backlog of tools, processes, and personalities.  It’s up to us to sort them all out.  Unfortunately, after 7 &frac12; months we’re still sorting. What I’d recommend for any blended team is to look at your current product lifecycles and work on a single lifecycle for all work.  If you can’t objectively come up with one process, that’s a good indication that the new team might not be a good fit for being a single unit (which happens all the time in bigger companies).  Go ahead & self-organize into sub-teams.  Then repeat the process. If you can come up with a single process, tackle each piece and standardize all of them.  Do this as soon as possible, as it can be uncomfortable.  Standardize your requirements gathering and tracking, your exploration and technical analysis, your project planning, development standards, validation and sustaining processes.  Standardize all of it.  Make this your top priority, get it out of the way, and get back to work. Lastly, managers of blended teams should realize what I’m suggesting is a disruptive process.  But you’ve just reorganized the team is already disrupted.   Don’t pull the bandage off slowly and force the team through a prolonged transition phase, lowering their productivity over the long term.  You can role model leadership to your team and drive a true consolidation.  Destroy roadblocks, reassure those on your team who are afraid of change, and push forward to create something efficient and beautiful.  Then use Scrum to reengage your customers in a way that they’ll love. Technorati tags: Scrum Scrum Process

    Read the article

  • O the Agony - Merging Scrum and Waterfall

    - by John K. Hines
    If there's nothing else to know about Scrum (and Agile in general), it's this: You can't force a team to adopt Agile methods.  In all cases, the team must want to change. Well, sure, you could force a team.  But it's going to be a horrible, painful process with a huge learning curve made even steeper by the lack of training and motivation on behalf of the team.  On a completely unrelated note, I've spent the past three months working on a team that was formed by merging three separate teams.  One of these teams has been adopting and using Agile practices like Scrum since 2007, the other was in continuous bug fix mode, releasing on average one new piece of software per year using semi-Waterfall methods.  In particular, one senior developer on the Waterfall team didn't see anything in Agile but overhead. Fast forward through three months of tension, passive resistance, process pushback, and you have seven people who want to change and one who explicitly doesn't.  It took two things to make Scrum happen: The team manager took a class called "Agile Software Development using Scrum". The team lead explained the point of Agile was to reduce the workload of the senior developer, with another senior developer and the manager present. It's incredible to me how a single person can strongly influence the direction of an entire team.  Let alone if Scrum comes down as some managerial decree onto a functioning team who have no idea what it is.  Pity the fool. On the bright side, I am now an expert at drawing Visio process flows.  And I have some gentle advice for any first-level managers: If you preside over a team process change, it's beneficial to start the discussion on how the team will work as early as possible.  You should have a vision for this and guide the discussion, even if decisions are weeks away.  Don't always root for the underdog.  It's been my experience that managers who see themselves as compassionate and caring spend a great deal of time understanding and advocating for the one person on the team who feels left out.  Remember that by focusing on this one person you risk alienating the rest of the team, allow tension to build, and delay the resolution of the problem. My way would have been to decree Scrum, force all of my processes on everyone else, and use the past three months ironing out the kinks.  Which takes us all the way back to point number one. Technorati tags: Scrum Scrum Process Scrum and Waterfall

    Read the article

  • Cross-language Extension Method Calling

    - by Tom Hines
    Extension methods are a concise way of binding functions to particular types. In my last post, I showed how Extension methods can be created in the .NET 2.0 environment. In this post, I discuss calling the extensions from other languages. Most of the differences I find between the Dot Net languages are mainly syntax.  The declaration of Extensions is no exception.  There is, however, a distinct difference with the framework accepting excensions made with C++ that differs from C# and VB.  When calling the C++ extension from C#, the compiler will SOMETIMES say there is no definition for DoCPP with the error: 'string' does not contain a definition for 'DoCPP' and no extension method 'DoCPP' accepting a first argument of type 'string' could be found (are you missing a using directive or an assembly reference?) If I recompile, the error goes away. The strangest problem with calling the C++ extension from C# is that I first must make SOME type of reference to the class BEFORE using the extension or it will not be recognized at all.  So, if I first call the DoCPP() as a static method, the extension works fine later.  If I make a dummy instantiation of the class, it works.  If I have no forward reference of the class, I get the same error as before and recompiling does not fix it.  It seems as if this none of this is supposed to work across the languages. I have made a few work-arounds to get the examples to compile and run. Note the following examples: Extension in C# using System; namespace Extension_CS {    public static class CExtension_CS    {  //in C#, the "this" keyword is the key.       public static void DoCS(this string str)       {          Console.WriteLine("CS\t{0:G}\tCS", str);       }    } } Extension in C++ /****************************************************************************\  * Here is the C++ implementation.  It is the least elegant and most quirky,  * but it works. \****************************************************************************/ #pragma once using namespace System; using namespace System::Runtime::CompilerServices;     //<-Essential // Reference: System.Core.dll //<- Essential namespace Extension_CPP {        public ref class CExtension_CPP        {        public:               [Extension] // or [ExtensionAttribute] /* either works */               static void DoCPP(String^ str)               {                      Console::WriteLine("C++\t{0:G}\tC++", str);               }        }; } Extension in VB ' Here is the VB implementation.  This is not as elegant as the C#, but it's ' functional. Imports System.Runtime.CompilerServices ' Public Module modExtension_VB 'Extension methods can be defined only in modules.    <Extension()> _       Public Sub DoVB(ByVal str As String)       Console.WriteLine("VB" & Chr(9) & "{0:G}" & Chr(9) & "VB", str)    End Sub End Module   Calling program in C# /******************************************************************************\  * Main calling program  * Intellisense and VS2008 complain about the CPP implementation, but with a  * little duct-tape, it works just fine. \******************************************************************************/ using System; using Extension_CPP; using Extension_CS; using Extension_VB; // vitual namespace namespace TestExtensions {    public static class CTestExtensions    {       /**********************************************************************\        * For some reason, this needs a direct reference into the C++ version        * even though it does nothing than add a null reference.        * The constructor provides the fake usage to please the compiler.       \**********************************************************************/       private static CExtension_CPP x = null;   // <-DUCT_TAPE!       static CTestExtensions()       {          // Fake usage to stop compiler from complaining          if (null != x) {} // <-DUCT_TAPE       }       static void Main(string[] args)       {          string strData = "from C#";          strData.DoCPP();          strData.DoCS();          strData.DoVB();       }    } }   Calling program in VB  Imports Extension_CPP Imports Extension_CS Imports Extension_VB Imports System.Runtime.CompilerServices Module TestExtensions_VB    <Extension()> _       Public Sub DoCPP(ByVal str As String)       'Framework does not treat this as an extension, so use the static       CExtension_CPP.DoCPP(str)    End Sub    Sub Main()       Dim strData As String = "from VB"       strData.DoCS()       strData.DoVB()       strData.DoCPP() 'fake    End Sub End Module  Calling program in C++ // TestExtensions_CPP.cpp : main project file. #include "stdafx.h" using namespace System; using namespace Extension_CPP; using namespace Extension_CS; using namespace Extension_VB; void main(void) {        /*******************************************************\         * Extension methods are called like static methods         * when called from C++.  There may be a difference in         * syntax when calling the VB extension as VB Extensions         * are embedded in Modules instead of classes        \*******************************************************/     String^ strData = "from C++";     CExtension_CPP::DoCPP(strData);     CExtension_CS::DoCS(strData);     modExtension_VB::DoVB(strData); //since Extensions go in Modules }

    Read the article

  • Application Lifecycle Management Tools

    - by John K. Hines
    Leading a team comprised of three former teams means that we have three of everything.  Three places to gather requirements, three (actually eight or nine) places for customers to submit support requests, three places to plan and track work. We’ve been looking into tools that combine these features into a single product.  Not just Agile planning tools, but those that allow us to look in a single place for requirements, work items, and reports. One of the interesting choices is Software Planner by Automated QA (the makers of Test Complete).  It's a lovely tool with real end-to-end process support.  We’re probably not going to use it for one reason – cost.  I’m sure our company could get a discount, but it’s on a concurrent user license that isn’t cheap for a large number of users.  Some initial guesswork had us paying over $6,000 for 3 concurrent users just to get started with the Enterprise version.  Still, it’s intuitive, has great Agile capabilities, and has a reputation for excellent customer support. At the moment we’re digging deeper into Rational Team Concert by IBM.  Reading the docs on this product makes me want to submit my resume to Big Blue.  Not only does RTC integrate everything we need, but it’s free for up to 10 developers.  It has beautiful support for all phases of Scrum.  We’re going to bring the sales representative in for a demo. This marks one of the few times that we’re trying to resist the temptation to write our own tool.  And I think this is the first time that something so complex may actually be capably provided by an external source.   Hooray for less work! Technorati tags: Scrum Scrum Tools

    Read the article

  • ResponseStatusLine protocol violation

    - by Tom Hines
    I parse/scrape a few web page every now and then and recently ran across an error that stated: "The server committed a protocol violation. Section=ResponseStatusLine".   After a few web searches, I found a couple of suggestions – one of which said the problem could be fixed by changing the HttpWebRequest ProtocolVersion to 1.0 with the command: 1: HttpWebRequest req = (HttpWebRequest)HttpWebRequest.Create(strURI); 2: req.ProtocolVersion = HttpVersion.Version10;   …but that did not work in my particular case.   What DID work was the next suggestion I found that suggested the use of the setting: “useUnsafeHeaderParsing” either in the app.config file or programmatically. If added to the app.config, it would be: 1: <!-- after the applicationSettings --> 2: <system.net> 3: <settings> 4: <httpWebRequest useUnsafeHeaderParsing ="true"/> 5: </settings> 6: </system.net>   If done programmatically, it would look like this: C++: 1: // UUHP_CPP.h 2: #pragma once 3: using namespace System; 4: using namespace System::Reflection; 5:   6: namespace UUHP_CPP 7: { 8: public ref class CUUHP_CPP 9: { 10: public: 11: static bool UseUnsafeHeaderParsing(String^% strError) 12: { 13: Assembly^ assembly = Assembly::GetAssembly(System::Net::Configuration::SettingsSection::typeid); //__typeof 14: if (nullptr==assembly) 15: { 16: strError = "Could not access Assembly"; 17: return false; 18: } 19:   20: Type^ type = assembly->GetType("System.Net.Configuration.SettingsSectionInternal"); 21: if (nullptr==type) 22: { 23: strError = "Could not access internal settings"; 24: return false; 25: } 26:   27: Object^ obj = type->InvokeMember("Section", 28: BindingFlags::Static | BindingFlags::GetProperty | BindingFlags::NonPublic, 29: nullptr, nullptr, gcnew array<Object^,1>(0)); 30:   31: if(nullptr == obj) 32: { 33: strError = "Could not invoke Section member"; 34: return false; 35: } 36:   37: FieldInfo^ fi = type->GetField("useUnsafeHeaderParsing", BindingFlags::NonPublic | BindingFlags::Instance); 38: if(nullptr == fi) 39: { 40: strError = "Could not access useUnsafeHeaderParsing field"; 41: return false; 42: } 43:   44: if (!(bool)fi->GetValue(obj)) 45: { 46: fi->SetValue(obj, true); 47: } 48:   49: return true; 50: } 51: }; 52: } C# (CSharp): 1: using System; 2: using System.Reflection; 3:   4: namespace UUHP_CS 5: { 6: public class CUUHP_CS 7: { 8: public static bool UseUnsafeHeaderParsing(ref string strError) 9: { 10: Assembly assembly = Assembly.GetAssembly(typeof(System.Net.Configuration.SettingsSection)); 11: if (null == assembly) 12: { 13: strError = "Could not access Assembly"; 14: return false; 15: } 16:   17: Type type = assembly.GetType("System.Net.Configuration.SettingsSectionInternal"); 18: if (null == type) 19: { 20: strError = "Could not access internal settings"; 21: return false; 22: } 23:   24: object obj = type.InvokeMember("Section", 25: BindingFlags.Static | BindingFlags.GetProperty | BindingFlags.NonPublic, 26: null, null, new object[] { }); 27:   28: if (null == obj) 29: { 30: strError = "Could not invoke Section member"; 31: return false; 32: } 33:   34: // If it's not already set, set it. 35: FieldInfo fi = type.GetField("useUnsafeHeaderParsing", BindingFlags.NonPublic | BindingFlags.Instance); 36: if (null == fi) 37: { 38: strError = "Could not access useUnsafeHeaderParsing field"; 39: return false; 40: } 41:   42: if (!Convert.ToBoolean(fi.GetValue(obj))) 43: { 44: fi.SetValue(obj, true); 45: } 46:   47: return true; 48: } 49: } 50: }   F# (FSharp): 1: namespace UUHP_FS 2: open System 3: open System.Reflection 4: module CUUHP_FS = 5: let UseUnsafeHeaderParsing(strError : byref<string>) : bool = 6: // 7: let assembly : Assembly = Assembly.GetAssembly(typeof<System.Net.Configuration.SettingsSection>) 8: if (null = assembly) then 9: strError <- "Could not access Assembly" 10: false 11: else 12: 13: let myType : Type = assembly.GetType("System.Net.Configuration.SettingsSectionInternal") 14: if (null = myType) then 15: strError <- "Could not access internal settings" 16: false 17: else 18: 19: let obj : Object = myType.InvokeMember("Section", BindingFlags.Static ||| BindingFlags.GetProperty ||| BindingFlags.NonPublic, null, null, Array.zeroCreate 0) 20: if (null = obj) then 21: strError <- "Could not invoke Section member" 22: false 23: else 24: 25: // If it's not already set, set it. 26: let fi : FieldInfo = myType.GetField("useUnsafeHeaderParsing", BindingFlags.NonPublic ||| BindingFlags.Instance) 27: if(null = fi) then 28: strError <- "Could not access useUnsafeHeaderParsing field" 29: false 30: else 31: 32: if (not(Convert.ToBoolean(fi.GetValue(obj)))) then 33: fi.SetValue(obj, true) 34: 35: // Now return true 36: true VB (Visual Basic): 1: Option Explicit On 2: Option Strict On 3: Imports System 4: Imports System.Reflection 5:   6: Public Class CUUHP_VB 7: Public Shared Function UseUnsafeHeaderParsing(ByRef strError As String) As Boolean 8:   9: Dim assembly As [Assembly] 10: assembly = [assembly].GetAssembly(GetType(System.Net.Configuration.SettingsSection)) 11:   12: If (assembly Is Nothing) Then 13: strError = "Could not access Assembly" 14: Return False 15: End If 16:   17: Dim type As Type 18: type = [assembly].GetType("System.Net.Configuration.SettingsSectionInternal") 19: If (type Is Nothing) Then 20: strError = "Could not access internal settings" 21: Return False 22: End If 23:   24: Dim obj As Object 25: obj = [type].InvokeMember("Section", _ 26: BindingFlags.Static Or BindingFlags.GetProperty Or BindingFlags.NonPublic, _ 27: Nothing, Nothing, New [Object]() {}) 28:   29: If (obj Is Nothing) Then 30: strError = "Could not invoke Section member" 31: Return False 32: End If 33:   34: ' If it's not already set, set it. 35: Dim fi As FieldInfo 36: fi = [type].GetField("useUnsafeHeaderParsing", BindingFlags.NonPublic Or BindingFlags.Instance) 37: If (fi Is Nothing) Then 38: strError = "Could not access useUnsafeHeaderParsing field" 39: Return False 40: End If 41:   42: If (Not Convert.ToBoolean(fi.GetValue(obj))) Then 43: fi.SetValue(obj, True) 44: End If 45:   46: Return True 47: End Function 48: End Class   Technorati Tags: C++,CPP,VB,Visual Basic,F#,FSharp,C#,CSharp,ResponseStatusLine,protocol violation

    Read the article

  • Using a Predicate as a key to a Dictionary

    - by Tom Hines
    I really love Linq and Lambda Expressions in C#.  I also love certain community forums and programming websites like DaniWeb. A user on DaniWeb posted a question about comparing the results of a game that is like poker (5-card stud), but is played with dice. The question stemmed around determining what was the winning hand.  I looked at the question and issued some comments and suggestions toward a potential answer, but I thought it was a neat homework exercise. [A little explanation] I eventually realized not only could I compare the results of the hands (by name) with a certain construct – I could also compare the values of the individual dice with the same construct. That piece of code eventually became a Dictionary with the KEY as a Predicate<int> and the Value a Func<T> that returns a string from the another structure that contains the mapping of an ENUM to a string.  In one instance, that string is the name of the hand and in another instance, it is a string (CSV) representation of of the digits in the hand. An added benefit is that the digits re returned in the order they would be for a proper poker hand.  For instance the hand 1,2,5,3,1 would be returned as ONE_PAIR (1,1,5,3,2). [Getting to the point] 1: using System; 2: using System.Collections.Generic; 3:   4: namespace DicePoker 5: { 6: using KVP_E2S = KeyValuePair<CDicePoker.E_DICE_POKER_HAND_VAL, string>; 7: public partial class CDicePoker 8: { 9: /// <summary> 10: /// Magical construction to determine the winner of given hand Key/Value. 11: /// </summary> 12: private static Dictionary<Predicate<int>, Func<List<KVP_E2S>, string>> 13: map_prd2fn = new Dictionary<Predicate<int>, Func<List<KVP_E2S>, string>> 14: { 15: {new Predicate<int>(i => i.Equals(0)), PlayerTie},//first tie 16:   17: {new Predicate<int>(i => i > 0), 18: (m => string.Format("Player One wins\n1={0}({1})\n2={2}({3})", 19: m[0].Key, m[0].Value, m[1].Key, m[1].Value))}, 20:   21: {new Predicate<int>(i => i < 0), 22: (m => string.Format("Player Two wins\n2={2}({3})\n1={0}({1})", 23: m[0].Key, m[0].Value, m[1].Key, m[1].Value))}, 24:   25: {new Predicate<int>(i => i.Equals(0)), 26: (m => string.Format("Tie({0}) \n1={1}\n2={2}", 27: m[0].Key, m[0].Value, m[1].Value))} 28: }; 29: } 30: } When this is called, the code calls the Invoke method of the predicate to return a bool.  The first on matching true will have its value invoked. 1: private static Func<DICE_HAND, E_DICE_POKER_HAND_VAL> GetHandEval = dh => 2: map_dph2fn[map_dph2fn.Keys.Where(enm2fn => enm2fn(dh)).First()]; After coming up with this process, I realized (with a little modification) it could be called to evaluate the individual values in the dice hand in the event of a tie. 1: private static Func<List<KVP_E2S>, string> PlayerTie = lst_kvp => 2: map_prd2fn.Skip(1) 3: .Where(x => x.Key.Invoke(RenderDigits(dhPlayerOne).CompareTo(RenderDigits(dhPlayerTwo)))) 4: .Select(s => s.Value) 5: .First().Invoke(lst_kvp); After that, I realized I could now create a program completely without “if” statements or “for” loops! 1: static void Main(string[] args) 2: { 3: Dictionary<Predicate<int>, Action<Action<string>>> main = new Dictionary<Predicate<int>, Action<Action<string>>> 4: { 5: {(i => i.Equals(0)), PlayGame}, 6: {(i => true), Usage} 7: }; 8:   9: main[main.Keys.Where(m => m.Invoke(args.Length)).First()].Invoke(Display); 10: } …and there you have it. :) ZIPPED Project

    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

  • There is No Scrum without Agile

    - by John K. Hines
    It's been interesting for me to dive a little deeper into Scrum after realizing how fragile its adoption can be.  I've been particularly impressed with James Shore's essay "Kaizen and Kaikaku" and the Net Objectives post "There are Better Alternatives to Scrum" by Alan Shalloway.  The bottom line: You can't execute Scrum well without being Agile. Personally, I'm the rare developer who has an interest in project management.  I think the methodology to deliver software is interesting, and that there are many roles whose job exists to make software development easier.  As a project lead I've seen Scrum deliver for disciplined, highly motivated teams with solid engineering practices.  It definitely made my job an order of magnitude easier.  As a developer I've experienced huge rewards from having a well-defined pipeline of tasks that were consistently delivered with high quality in short iterations.  In both of these cases Scrum was an addition to a fundamentally solid process and a huge benefit to the team. The question I'm now facing is how Scrum fits into organizations withot solid engineering practices.  The trend that concerns me is one of Scrum being mandated as the single development process across teams where it may not apply.  And we have to realize that Scurm itself isn't even a development process.  This is what worries me the most - the assumption that Scrum on its own increases developer efficiency when it is essentially an exercise in project management. Jim's essay quotes Tobias Mayer writing, "Scrum is a framework for surfacing organizational dysfunction."  I'm unsure whether a Vice President of Software Development wants to hear that, reality nonwithstanding.  Our Scrum adoption has surfaced a great deal of dysfunction, but I feel the original assumption was that we would experience increased efficiency.  It's starting to feel like a blended approach - Agile/XP techniques for developers, Scrum for project managers - may be a better fit.  Or at least, a better way of framing the conversation. The blended approach. Technorati tags: Agile Scrum

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >