Search Results

Search found 5335 results on 214 pages for 'agile processes'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 6/214 | < Previous Page | 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13  | Next Page >

  • SOA Governance Starts with People and Processes

    - by Jyothi Swaroop
    While we all agree that SOA Governance is about People, Processes and Technology. Some experts are of the opinion that SOA Governance begins with People and Processes but needs to be empowered with technology to achieve the best results. Here's an interesting piece from David Linthicum on eBizq: In the world of SOA, the concept of SOA governance is getting a lot of attention. However, how SOA governance is defined and implemented really depends on the SOA governance vendor who just left the building within most enterprises. Indeed, confusion is a huge issue when considering SOA governance, and the core issues are more about the fundamentals of people and processes, and not about the technology. SOA governance is a concept used for activities related to exercising control over services in an SOA, including tracking the services, monitoring the service, and controlling changes made to the services, simple put. The trouble comes in when SOA governance vendors attempt to define SOA governance around their technology, all with different approaches to SOA governance. Thus, it's important that those building SOAs within the enterprise take a step back and understand what really need to support the concept of SOA governance. The value of SOA governance is pretty simple. Since services make up the foundation of an SOA, and are at their essence the behavior and information from existing systems externalized, it's critical to make sure that those accessing, creating, and changing services do so using a well controlled and orderly mechanism. Those of you, who already have governance in place, typically around enterprise architecture efforts, will be happy to know that SOA governance does not replace those processes, but becomes a mechanism within the larger enterprise governance concept. People and processes are first thing on the list to get under control before you begin to toss technology at this problem. This means establishing an understanding of SOA governance within the team members, including why it's important, who's involved, and the core processes that are to be follow to make SOA governance work. Indeed, when creating the core SOA governance strategy should really be independent of the technology. The technology will change over the years, but the core processes and discipline should be relatively durable over time.

    Read the article

  • Multiple .NET processes memory footprint

    - by mr.b
    I am developing an application suite that consists of several applications which user can run as needed (they can run all at the same time, or only several..). My concern is in physical memory footprint of each process, as shown in task manager. I am aware that Framework does memory management behind the curtains in terms that it devotes parts of memory for certain things that are not directly related to my application. The question. Does .NET Framework has some way of minimizing memory footprint of processes it runs when there are several processes running at the same time? (Noobish guess ahead) Like, if System.dll is already loaded by one process, does framework load it for each process, or it has some way of sharing it between processes? I am in no way striving to write as small (resource-wise) apps as possible (if I were, I probably wouldn't be using .NET Framework in the first place), but if there's something I can do something about over-using resources, I'd like to know about it.

    Read the article

  • Shared Variable Among Ruby Processes

    - by Jesse J
    I have a Ruby program that loads up two very large yaml files, so I can get some speed-up by taking advantage of the multiple cores by forking off some processes. I've tried looking, but I'm having trouble figuring how, or even if, I can share variables in different processes. The following code is what I currently have: @proteins = "" @decoyProteins = "" fork do @proteins = YAML.load_file(database) exit end fork do @decoyProteins = YAML.load_file(database) exit end p @proteins["LVDK"] P displays nil though because of the fork. So is it possible to have the forked processes share the variables? And if so, how?

    Read the article

  • Spawning and waiting for child processes in Python

    - by Brendan Long
    The relevant part of the code looks like this: pids = [] for size in SIZES: pids.append(os.spawnv(os.P_NOWAIT, RESIZECMD, [RESIZECMD, lotsOfOptions])) # Wait for all spawned imagemagick processes to finish while pids: (pid, status) = os.waitpid(0, 0) if pid: pids.remove(pid) What this should be doing is spawning all of the processes off, then waiting for each process to finish before continuing. What it does is work for the most part but sometimes crash on the next section (when it expects all of these processes to be finished). Is there something wrong with this? Is there a better way of doing it? The environment it has to work on is CentOS with Python 2.4, but I'm testing on Cygwin with Python 2.5, so it could be that it fails on my machine but will work on the Linux one (the Linux machine is very slow and this error is rare, so I haven't been able to get it on there).

    Read the article

  • How to be Agile when new work keeps affecting completed work?

    - by jdln
    The project I'm working on is to re-skin an existing website. The functionally will stay the same, its just the styles that are changing. The HTML is not changing, I'm only modifying the CSS files. The site is pretty complex. There are dozens of pages. Users can be logged in and have a number of different roles. Depending on their role the content of the page and what pages they are allowed to see varys. We're using GIT and Github. I'm trying to write CSS that works as components. So when the same form elements, headings, etc appear on multiple pages they are already styled and are consistent. Most of time this is working well. Sadly the format and class names in the HTML are at times messy and unpredictable. When I fix something on one page it can break another. The job is also harder as no one knows exactly all the variations that are possible due to the user roles. As such I'm continuously finding new variations as I go along. I'm making headway by putting a lot of comments in my CSS. If I need to remove a CSS rule Ill comment it out so I can still see it with the chrome dev tools, and ill put a comment in the CSS saying why I removed it and for what page this was done. This means that if on another page I'm about to add add the rule to fix a different problem, there is more of a chance I will see how this would break the first page. This allows me to either find a different solution that will work for both pages, or I can make the override page specific. This has been working quite well for me. If I had complete free reign and the only deadline was to finish the project by the end then this method would be fine. However my manager is trying to mitigate risk by breaking the work into areas to be completed per sprint. This is counter to how I have been approaching things as something like my typography styles will affect all other pages on the site. The other issue is that the different stakeholders want to sign off each section as I go along. However once I've finished a section it may change if I change CSS that affects it and also affects a new section I'm working on. I've asked that the stakeholders have a quick unofficial sign off in stages (eg per sprint), and have the final official sign off at the end of the project, but this is being met with resistance. I do understand why it would be higher risk to do this, but the only way to guarantee that a signed off section will not change is to make ALL future changes page specific. In addition to this I'm being told that all work that I push to the Git repo should be ready to go live, and as such should not contain any code comments. This is risky for me as I wont know until I've finished the site if I will ever benefit from these comments or not. Has anyone else been in a similar situation and managed to find a compromise that worked for my development approach and also the desires of management and stakeholders to have a more Agile approach? A more Agile workflow works great when you can break the work into components and know that once something is done it wont be affected by future work. However the nature of this project makes this hard to achieve.

    Read the article

  • How is architectural design done in an agile environment?

    - by B?????
    I have read Principles for the Agile Architect, where they defined next principles : Principle #1 The teams that code the system design the system. Principle #2 Build the simplest architecture that can possibly work. Principle #3 When in doubt, code it out. Principle #4 They build it, they test it. Principle #5 The bigger the system, the longer the runway. Principle #6 System architecture is a role collaboration. Principle #7 There is no monopoly on innovation. The paper says that most of the architecture design is done during the coding phase, and only system design before that. That is fine. So, how is the system design done? Using UML? Or a document that defines interfaces and major blocks? Maybe something else?

    Read the article

  • Continuous builds and Agile vs commit often

    - by Mark Underwood
    Hi All, I'm just doing some formal training in Agile at the moment and one question I have is about the value of Continuous Builds vs value of committing to the version control system often. My understanding with version control is that its better to commit often, because then you have history and the ability to go back to previous changes in a fine grained way. My understanding with Agile and continuous build is that its there to put pressure on the developers to always have working code. That to break the source tree is a taboo thing to do. Now i agree with both of these sentiments, but it occurs to be that sometimes these might be working against each other. You maybe in the middle of a largish code change and want to commit code to make sure you have history, but this will break the source tree. Anybody got any thoughts on this? Cheers Mark.

    Read the article

  • Cowboy Agile?

    - by Robert May
    In a previous post, I outlined the rules of Scrum.  This post details one of those rules. I’ve often heard similar phrases around Scrum that clue me in to someone who doesn’t understand Scrum.  The phrases go something like this: “We don’t do Agile because the idea of letting people just do whatever they want is wrong.  We believe in a more structured approach.” (i.e. Work is Prison, and I’m the Warden!) “I love Agile.  Agile lets us do whatever we want!” (Cowboy Agile?) “We’re Agile, but we use a process that I’ve created.” (Cowboy Agile?) All of those phrases have one thing in common:  The assumption that Agile, and I mean Scrum, lets you do whatever you want.  This is simply not true. Executing Scrum properly requires more dedication, rigor, and diligence than happens in most traditional development methods. Scrum and Waterfall Compared Since Scrum and Waterfall are two of the most commonly used methodologies, a little bit of contrasting and comparing is in order. Waterfall Scrum A project manager defines all tasks and then manages the tasks that team members are working on. The team members define the tasks and estimates of the stories for the current iteration.  Any team member may work on any task in the iteration. Usually only a few milestones that need to be met, the milestones are measured in months, and these milestones are expected to be missed.  Little work is ever done to improve estimates and poor estimators can hide behind high estimates. Stories must be delivered every iteration, milestones are measured in hours, and the team is expected to figure out why their estimates were wrong, even when they were under.  Repeated misses can get the entire team fired. Partially completed work is normal. Partially completed work doesn’t count. Nobody knows the task you’re working on. Everyone knows what you’re working on, whether or not you’re making progress and how much longer you think its going to take, in hours. Little requirement to show working code.  Prototypes are ok. Working code must be shown each iteration.  No smoke and mirrors allowed.  Testing is done in lengthy cycles at the end of development.  Developers aren’t held accountable. Testing is part of the team.  If the testers don’t accept the story as complete, the team can’t count it.  Complete means that the story’s functionality works as designed.  The team can’t have any open defects on the story. Velocity is rarely truly measured and difficult to evaluate. Velocity is integral to the process and can be seen at a glance and everyone in the company knows what it is. A business analyst writes requirements.  Designers mock up screens.  Developers hide behind “I did it just like the spec doc told me to and made the screen exactly like the picture” Developers are expected to collaborate in real time.  If a design is bad or lacks needed details, the developers are required to get it right in the iteration, because all software must be functional.  Designers and Business Analysts are part of the team and must do their work in iterations slightly ahead of the developers. Upper Management is often surprised.  “You told me things were going well two months ago!” Management receives updates at the end of every iteration showing them exactly what the team did and how that compares to what' is remaining in the backlog.  Managers know every iteration what their money is buying. Status meetings are rare or don’t occur.  Email is a primary form of communication. Teams coordinate every single day with each other and use other high bandwidth communication channels to make sure they’re making progress.  Email is used only as a last resort.  Instead, team members stand up, walk to each other, and talk, face to face.  If that’s not possible, they pick up the phone. IF someone asks what happened, its at the end of a lengthy development cycle measured in months, and nobody really knows why it happened. Someone asks what happened every iteration.  The team talks about what happened, and then adapts to make sure that what happened either never happens again or happens every time.   That’s probably enough for now.  As you can see, a lot is required of Scrum teams! One of the key differences in Scrum is that the burden for many activities is shifted to a group of people who share responsibility, instead of a single person having responsibility.  This is a very good thing, since small groups usually come up with better and more insightful work than single individuals.  This shift also results in better velocity.  Team members can take vacations and the rest of the team simply picks up the slack.  With Waterfall, if a key team member takes a vacation, delays can ensue. Scrum requires much more out of every team member and as a result, Scrum teams outperform non-Scrum teams working 60 hour weeks. Recommended Reading Everyone considering Scrum should read Mike Cohn’s excellent book, User Stories Applied. Technorati Tags: Agile,Scrum,Waterfall

    Read the article

  • AutoVue 20.2 for Agile Released

    - by Kerrie Foy
    I saw an important post on the Oracle's AutoVue Enterprise Visualization Blog that I wanted to share with you all in the Agile community.  This was originally posted by Angus Graham here. AutoVue 20.2 for Agile Released Oracle’s AutoVue 20.2 for Agile PLM is now available on Oracle’s Software Delivery Cloud. This latest release allows Agile PLM customers to take advantage of new AutoVue 20.2 features in the following Agile PLM environments: 9.3.1.x; 9.3.0.  AutoVue 20.2 delivers improvements in the following areas. New Format Support: AutoVue 20.2 adds support for the latest versions of popular file formats including: ECAD: Cadence Concept HDL 16.5, Allegro Layout 16.5, Orcad Capture 16.5, Board Station ASCII Symbol Geometry, Cadence Cell Library MCAD: CATIA V5 R21, PTC Creo Parametric 1.0, Creo Element\Direct Modeling 17.10, 17.20, 17.25, 17.30, 18.00, SolidWorks 2012, SolidEdge ST3 & ST4, PLM XML 2D CAD: Creo Element/Direct Drafting 17.10 to 18.00 Office: MS Office 2010: Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Outlook Enhancements to AutoVue enterprise readiness: reliability and performance improvements, as well as security enhancements which adhere to Oracle’s Software Security Assurance standards Updated version of AutoVue Document Print Service offerings, which include the ability to select CAD layers for printing  For further details, check out the What’s New in AutoVue 20.2 datasheet

    Read the article

  • Agile PLM Highlights from Oracle OpenWorld 2012

    - by Kerrie Foy
    Thank you to everyone who joined us at Oracle OpenWorld this year, either in person or virtually (thanks for tweeting #oowplm)!  From customer presentations to after-hours networking opportunities, there was a lot to see and do during the entire conference. Sessions It was our pleasure to feature several customer speakers during our PLM sessions at OpenWorld from such companies as Starbucks, Coca-Cola, Facebook, Eli Lilly, and many more.  Each had a unique perspective to share and fascinating insight into how they successfully leverage Agile PLM to facilitate profitable innovation, protect brand integrity, streamline operations, manage compliance, launch faster, etc.  For example, during the Product Value Chain keynote session, CIO Chris Bedi of JDSU shared how they implemented Agile PLM to support business imperatives around rapid innovation, centralizing product information, collaboration, and eliminate the “Excel gymnastics” required to obtain global portfolio visibility. In just 120 days after implementing, JDSU employees reported significant improvements around product record management, new product introduction, engineering collaboration and more, which created a better work environment to enable critical innovation. I could write on and on about the almost 20 sessions! So to spare yourselves, please visit launch.oracle.com/?plmopenworld2012; it’s a curated selection of PLM presentations from the OpenWorld Content Catalog and available on-demand. Enjoy! Agile Innovation Management During OpenWorld, we announced an exciting new addition to the Agile PLM applications called Innovation Management that redefines the industry’s scope of product lifecycle management.  Our broad vision of complete enterprise PLM for the entire Product Value Chain already broke new ground by helping organizations extend PLM disciplines downstream by connecting product design to commercialization processes; now we are helping executives look farther upstream in the early innovation phases to ultimately close the gap between strategy and execution that so commonly nags innovation initiatives.  More on this coming soon so stay tuned! Unique Networking Opportunities  We know it can be challenging during OpenWorld to find time to productively connect and network with your industry peers, so we hosted an Agile PLM “Birds of a Feather” networking brunch for the second year in a row.  At a fine restaurant close to Moscone we hosted nine tables, each with only ten seats to encourage active conversation.  Furthermore, guests could select from a list of predetermined table topics sponsored by a specialized PLM partner to guarantee – even more so – that they were seated with like-minded company and optimizing their time at the conference.  Everyone enjoyed the opportunity to easily connect with other PLM users during OpenWorld in a more casual setting. What’s Next? Thank you again to all who joined us!  If you haven't yet, mark your calendar to join us for the next Oracle Agile PLM conference at the Value Chain Summit in San Francisco, February 4-6 in 2013!  We’ll have 40 sessions of PLM content in four tracks. Don’t miss it! You can sign up to be notified when official registration opens by visiting www.oracle.com/goto/vcs. 

    Read the article

  • Agile Entity Framework 4 Repository: Part 6: Mocks & Unit Tests

    I did finish this series, honest I did. But not in the blog. Ive shown this in a number of conferences and even in my book, but I never came back and wrote it all down. In fact, I had the whole solutino written before I began the series, but it has gone through a lot of changes. Where did I leave off? Agile Entity Framework 4 Repository: Part 1- Model and POCO Classes Agile Entity Framework 4 Repository: Part 2- The Repository Agile EF4 Repository: Part 3 -Fine Tuning the Repository Agile...Did you know that DotNetSlackers also publishes .net articles written by top known .net Authors? We already have over 80 articles in several categories including Silverlight. Take a look: here.

    Read the article

  • Hologic Ensures Regulatory Compliance & UDI with Agile PLM for the Medical Device Industry

    - by Ulf Köster
    A new success story featuring Hologic, Inc., is now available. Hologic is known for developing innovative medical technology—like the world’s first 3-D mammogram—that can quickly diagnose women’s health issues and save lives in the process.The success story features Hologic’s use of Oracle Agile PLM to ensure regulatory compliance in every phase of product development, including managing all product-related data, design history files, and device master records. Hologic is using Oracle Agile PLM as the foundation for Unique Device Identification (UDI). Thanks to Agile PLM, Hologic can easily interface with the FDA’s database (GUDID) to streamline compliance, without devoting additional time and resources towards a new solution. Hologic is one of the first 2 companies granted production accounts by the FDA for GUDID submittal, and is the first company to submit official data. This an important milestone for Oracle Agile PLM, our partner Inspirage and the Medical Device industry as a whole. Read the full story here!

    Read the article

  • When Agile goes wrong

    - by Chepech
    Im writing an Agile course for some of the new guys we are on-boarding recently and I want to add a cautionary tale so they understand that Agile is not meant for all projects. My problem is that because of the nature of the projects I work in Agile has worked pretty well so far so I can't honestly point out what can go wrong and why when you use it in the wrong kind of project. Does anyone have a good real life example of a project where an Agile approach (e.g. Scurm) simply didn't worked out?

    Read the article

  • Agile: User Stories for Machine Learning Project?

    - by benjismith
    I've just finished up with a prototype implementation of a supervised learning algorithm, automatically assigning categorical tags to all the items in our company database (roughly 5 million items). The results look good, and I've been given the go-ahead to plan the production implementation project. I've done this kind of work before, so I know how the functional components of the software. I need a collection of web crawlers to fetch data. I need to extract features from the crawled documents. Those documents need to be segregated into a "training set" and a "classification set", and feature-vectors need to be extracted from each document. Those feature vectors are self-organized into clusters, and the clusters are passed through a series of rebalancing operations. Etc etc etc etc. So I put together a plan, with about 30 unique development/deployment tasks, each with time estimates. The first stage of development -- ignoring some advanced features that we'd like to have in the long-term, but aren't high enough priority to make it into the development schedule yet -- is slated for about two months worth of work. (Keep in mind that I already have a working prototype, so the final implementation is significantly simpler than if the project was starting from scratch.) My manager said the plan looked good to him, but he asked if I could reorganize the tasks into user stories, for a few reasons: (1) our project management software is totally organized around user stories; (2) all of our scheduling is based on fitting entire user stories into sprints, rather than individually scheduling tasks; (3) other teams -- like the web developers -- have made great use of agile methodologies, and they've benefited from modelling all the software features as user stories. So I created a user story at the top level of the project: As a user of the system, I want to search for items by category, so that I can easily find the most relevant items within a huge, complex database. Or maybe a better top-level story for this feature would be: As a content editor, I want to automatically create categorical designations for the items in our database, so that customers can easily find high-value data within our huge, complex database. But that's not the real problem. The tricky part, for me, is figuring out how to create subordinate user stories for the rest of the machine learning architecture. Case in point... I know that the algorithm requires two major architectural subdivisions: (A) training, and (B) classification. And I know that the training portion of the architecture requires construction of a cluster-space. All the Agile Development literature I've read seems to indicate that a user story should be the "smallest possible implementation that provides any business value". And that makes a lot of sense when designing a piece of end-user software. Start small, and then incrementally add value when users demand additional functionality. But a cluster-space, in and of itself, provides zero business value. Nor does a crawler, or a feature-extractor. There's no business value (not for the end-user, or for any of the roles internal to the company) in a partial system. A trained cluster-space is only possible with the crawler and feature extractor, and only relevant if we also develop an accompanying classifier. I suppose it would be possible to create user stories where the subordinate components of the system act as the users in the stories: As a supervised-learning cluster-space construction routine, I want to consume data from a feature extractor, so that I can exist. But that seems really weird. What benefit does it provide me as the developer (or our users, or any other stakeholders, for that matter) to model my user stories like that? Although the main story can be easily divided along architectural-component boundaries (crawler, trainer, classifier, etc), I can't think of any useful decomposition from a user's perspective. What do you guys think? How do you plan Agile user stories for sophisticated, indivisible, non-user-facing components?

    Read the article

  • How to properly document functionality in an agile project?

    - by RoboShop
    So recently, we've just finished the first phase of our project. We used agile with fortnightly sprints. And whilst the application turned out well, we're now turning our eyes on some of the maintenance tasks. One maintenance task is that all of our documentation appears in the form of specs. These specs describe 1 or more stories and generally are a body of work which a few devs could knock over in a week. For development, that works really well - every two weeks, the devs get handed a spec and it's a nice discrete chunk of work that they can just do. From a documentation point of view, this has become a mess. The problem with writing specs that are focused on delivering just-in-time requirements to developers is we haven't placed much emphasis on the big picture. Specs come from all different angles - it could be describing a standard function, it could describing parts of a workflow, it could be describing a particular screen... And now, we have business rules about our application scattered across 120 documents. Looking for any document for a particular business rule or function in particular is quite hard because you don't know which document has this information, and making a change request is equally hard because once again, we are unsure about which spec to make the change. So we have maybe a couple of weeks of lull before it's back to specing out functionality for the next phase but in this time, I'd like to re-visit our processes. I think the way we have worked so far in terms of delivering fortnightly specs works well. But we also need a way to manage our documentation so that our business rules for a given function / workflow are easy to locate / change. I have two ideas. One is we compile all of our specs into a series of master specs broken by a few broad functional areas. The specs describe the sprint, the master spec describe the system. The only problem I can see is 1) Our existing 120 specs are not all neatly defined into broad functional areas. Some will require breaking up, merging etc. which will take a lot of time. 2) We'll be writing specs and updating master specs in each new sprint. Seems like double the work, and then do the devs look at the spec or the master spec? My other suggestion is to concede that our documentation is too big of a mess, and manage that mess going forward. So we go through each spec, assign like keywords to it, and then when we want to search for a function, we search for that keyword. Problems I can see 1) Still the problem of business rules scattered everywhere, keywords just make it easier to find it. anyway, if anyone has any decent ideas or any experience to share about how best to manage documentation, would really appreciate it.

    Read the article

  • Agile team with no dedicated Tester members. Insane or efficient?

    - by MetaFight
    I'm a software developer. I've been thinking a lot about the efficiency of the Software Testers I've worked with so far in my career. In fact, I've been thinking a lot about the Software Testers role in general and have reached a potentially contentious conclusion: Non-developer Software Testers staff are less efficient at software testing than developers. Now, before everyone gets upset, hear me out. This isn't mere opinion: Software Testing and Software Development both require a lot of skills in common: Problem solving Thinking about corner cases Analytical skills The ability to define clear and concise step-by-step scenarios What developers have in addition to this is the ability to automate their tests. Yes, I know non-dev testers can automate their tests too, but that often then becomes a test maintenance issue. Because automating UI tests is essentially programming, non-dev members encounter all the same difficulties software developers encounter: Copy-pasta, lack of code reusibility/maintainability, etc. So, I was wondering. Why not replace all non-dev roles with developer roles? Developers have the skills required to perform Software Testing tasks, and they have the skills to automate tests and keep them maintainable. Would the following work: Hire a bunch of developers and split them into 2 roles: Software developers Software developers doing testing (some manual, mostly automated by writing integration tests, unit tests, etc) Software developers doing application support. (I've removed this as it is probably a separate question altogether) And, in our case since we're doing Agile development, rotate the roles every sprint or two. Also, if at all possible, try to have people spend their Developer stints and Testing stints on different projects. Ideally you would want to reduce the turnover rate per rotation. So maybe you could have 2 groups and make sure the rotation cycles of the groups are elided. So, for example, if each rotation was two sprints long, the two groups would have their rotations 1 sprint apart. That way there's only a 50% turn-over rate per sprint. Am I crazy, or could this work? (Obviously a key component to this working is that all devs want to be in the 3 roles. Let's assume I'm starting a new company and I can hire these ideal people) Edit I've removed the phrase "QA", as apparently we are using it incorrectly where I work.

    Read the article

  • Scrum Master Stephen Forte Teaches Agile Development, Silverlight and BI at GIDS 2010

    - by rajesh ahuja
    Great Indian Developer Summit 2010 – Gold Standard for India's Software Developer Ecosystem Bangalore, March 25, 2010: The author of several books on application and database development including Programming SQL Server 2008 and certified Scrum Master Stephen Forte is coming this summer to India's biggest summit for the developer ecosystem - Great Indian Developer Summit. At the summit, Stephen will conduct a workshop guaranteed to give attendees a jump start in taking a certified scrum master exam. Scrum, one of the most popular Agile project management and development methods, which is starting to be adopted at major corporations and on very large projects. After an introduction to the basics of Scrum like project planning and estimation, the Scrum Master, team, product owner and burn down, and of course the daily Scrum, Stephen will show many real world applications of the methodology drawn from his own experience as a Scrum Master. Negotiating with the business, estimation and team dynamics are all discussed as well as how to use Scrum in small organizations, large enterprise environments and consulting environments. Stephen will also discuss using Scrum with virtual teams and an off-shoring environment. He will then take a look at the tools we will use for Agile development, including planning poker, unit testing, and much more. On 20th April at the GIDS.NET Conference, Stephen will also conduct a series of sessions on Microsoft computing technologies. He will teach how to build data driven, n-tier Rich Internet Applications (RIA) with Silverlight 4.0. Line of business applications (LOB) in Silverlight 4.0 are easy by tapping the power of WCF RIA Services, the Silverlight Toolkit, and elevated out of browser support. Stephen's demo centric session will walk you through an example of building a LOB application with Silverlight 4.0. See how Silverlight and WCF RIA Services support domain logic, services, data binding, validation, server based paging, authentication, authorization and much more. Silverlight 4.0 means business. Silverlight runs C# and Visual Basic code, and so it seems natural that a business application might share some code between the Silverlight client and its ASP.NET Web server. You may want to run some code client-side for interactivity, but re-run that code on the server for security or reliability. This is possible, and there are several techniques you can use to accomplish this goal. In Stephen's second talk learn about the various techniques and their pros and cons. Some techniques work better in C#, others in VB. Still others are simpler with a little extra tooling or code-generation. Any serious Silverlight business application will almost certainly face this issue, and this session gets you going fast. In the third talk, Stephen will explain how to properly architect and deploy a BI application using a mix of some exciting new tools and some old familiar ones. He will start with a traditional relational transaction centric database (OLTP) and explore ways to build a data warehouse (OLAP), looking at the star and snowflake schemas. Next he will look at the process of extraction, transformation, and loading (ETL) your OLTP data into your data warehouse. Different techniques for ETL will be described and the various tradeoffs will be discussed. Then he will look at using the warehouse for reporting, drill down, and data analysis in Microsoft Excel's PowerPivot 2010. The session will round off by showing how to properly build a cube and build a data analysis application on top of that cube, and conclude by looking at some tools to help with the data visualization process. Every year, GIDS is a game changer for several thousands of IT professionals, providing them with a competitive edge over their peers, enlightening them with bleeding-edge information most useful in their daily jobs, helping them network with world-class experts and visionaries, and providing them with a much needed thrust in their careers. Attend Great Indian Developer Summit to gain the information, education and solutions you seek. From post-conference workshops, breakout sessions by expert instructors, keynotes by industry heavyweights, enhanced networking opportunities, and more. About Great Indian Developer Summit Great Indian Developer Summit is the gold standard for India's software developer ecosystem for gaining exposure to and evaluating new projects, tools, services, platforms, languages, software and standards. Packed with premium knowledge, action plans and advise from been-there-done-it veterans, creators, and visionaries, the 2010 edition of Great Indian Developer Summit features focused sessions, case studies, workshops and power panels that will transform you into a force to reckon with. Featuring 3 co-located conferences: GIDS.NET, GIDS.Web, GIDS.Java and an exclusive day of in-depth tutorials - GIDS.Workshops, from 20 April to 24 April at the IISc campus in Bangalore. At GIDS you'll participate in hundreds of sessions encompassing the full range of Microsoft computing, Java, Agile, RIA, Rich Web, open source/standards, languages, frameworks and platforms, practical tutorials that deep dive into technical skill and best practices, inspirational keynote presentations, an Expo Hall featuring dozens of the latest projects and products activities, engaging networking events, and the interact with the best and brightest of speakers from around the world. For further information on GIDS 2010, please visit the summit on the web http://www.developersummit.com/ A Saltmarch Media Press Release E: [email protected] Ph: +91 80 4005 1000

    Read the article

  • Agile Uploader error code 2101?

    - by adamwstl
    I'm trying to install Agile Uploader, but keep running into an error code 2101 (no other message besides that.) Any idea what error code "2101" means? Whenever I try to submit/upload (when I call agileUploaderSubmit()), nothing seems to happen and with Firebug mode on, all the log prints out is that code. I can't find anything that tells me what it means. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Do the ideas of traditional software engineering conflict with the newer agile development technique

    - by fuentesjr
    So as a developer I am seeking to improve not only my coding skills but my design and management skills. Because of this I'm starting to pay more attention to software engineering practices but i'm not sure where agile development fits into the picture. I can appreciate agility in projects but I wonder whether this conflicts with the traditional ways of software engineering practices and research.

    Read the article

  • Initial Modelling/Design Activities on Agile Projects

    - by dalton
    When developing an application using agile techniques, what if any initial modelling/architecture activities do you do, and how do you capture that knowledge?? The closest thing I've seen so far is Scott Ambler's Initial Architecture Modelling, but was wondering what alternatives are used out there?

    Read the article

  • Agile Web Development

    - by sidcom
    Hi all Im looking for some resources and information around agile web development. I have done a search and found a wiki page and lots of other sites around the subject. Most of these sites are orientated around Ruby on Rails. Does anyone know of any sites or resources that cover other platforms and languages like asp.net and php or are even generic. Thanks

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13  | Next Page >