Search Results

Search found 2159 results on 87 pages for 'film industry'.

Page 62/87 | < Previous Page | 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69  | Next Page >

  • jQuery AJAX Character Encoding Problem

    - by Salty
    Hi everyone, I'm currently coding a French website. There's a schedule page, where a link on the side can be used to load another day's schedule. http://aquate.us/film/horaire.html (At the moment, only the links for November 13th and November 14th work) Here's the JS I'm using to do this: <script type="text/javascript"> function load(y) { $.get(y,function(d) { $("#replace").html(d); mod(); }); } function mod() { $("#dates a").click(function() { y = $(this).attr("href"); load(y); return false; }); } mod(); </script> The actual AJAX works like a charm. My problem lies with the response to the request. Because it is a French website, there are many accented letters. I'm using the ISO-8859-15 charset for that very reason. However, in the response to my AJAX request, the accents are becoming ?'s because the character encoding seems to be changed back to UTF-8. How do I avoid this? I've already tried adding some PHP at the top of the requested documents to set the character set: <?php header('Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-15'); ?> But that doesn't seem to work either. Any thoughts? Also, while any of you are looking here...why does the rightmost column seem to become smaller when a new page is loaded, causing the table to distort and each <li> within the <td> to wrap to the next line? Cheers

    Read the article

  • PostgreSQL: Full Text Search - How to search partial words ?

    - by Anthoni Gardner
    Hello, Following a question posted here about how I can increase the speed on one of my SQL Search methods, I was advised to update my table to make use of Full Text Search. This is what I have now done, using Gist indexes to make searching faster. On some of the "plain" queries I have noticed a marked increase which I am very happy about. However, I am having difficulty in searching for partial words. For example I have several records that contain the word Squire (454) and I have several records that contain Squirrel (173). Now if I search for Squire it only returns the 454 records but I also want it to return the Squirrel records as well. My query looks like this SELECT title FROM movies WHERE vectors @@ to_tsoquery('squire'); I thought I could do to_tsquery('squire%') but that does not work. How do I get it to search for partial matches ? Also, in my database I have records that are movies and others that are just TV Shows. These are differentiated by the "" over the name, so like "Munsters" is a TV Show, whereas The Munsters is the film of the show. What I want to be able to do is search for just the TV Show AND just the movies. Any idea on how I can achieve this ? Regards Anthoni

    Read the article

  • Using Regex Replace when looking for un-escaped characters

    - by Daniel Hollinrake
    I've got a requirement that is basically this. If I have a string of text such as "There once was an 'ugly' duckling but it could never have been \'Scarlett\' Johansen" then I'd like to match the quotes that haven't already been escaped. These would be the ones around 'ugly' not the ones around 'Scarlett'. I've spent quite a while on this using a little C# console app to test things and have come up with the following solution. private static void RegexFunAndGames() { string result; string sampleText = @"Mr. Grant and Ms. Kelly starred in the film \'To Catch A Thief' but not in 'Stardust' because they'd stopped acting by then"; string rePattern = @"\\'"; string replaceWith = "'"; Console.WriteLine(sampleText); Regex regEx = new Regex(rePattern); result = regEx.Replace(sampleText, replaceWith); result = result.Replace("'", @"\'"); Console.WriteLine(result); } Basically what I've done is a two step process find those characters that have already been escaped, undo that then do everything again. It sounds a bit clumsy and I feel that there could be a better way.

    Read the article

  • javascript scope problem when lambda function refers to a variable in enclosing loop

    - by Stefan Blixt
    First question on stackoverflow :) Hope I won't embarrass myself... I have a javascript function that loads a list of albums and then it creates a list item for each album. The list item should be clickable, so I call jQuery's click() with a function that does stuff. I do this in a loop. My problem is that all items seem to get the same click function, even though I try to make a new one that does different stuff in each iteration. Another possibility is that the iteration variable is global somehow, and the function refers to it. Code below. debug() is just an encapsulation of Firebug's console.debug(). function processAlbumList(data, c) { for (var album in data) { var newAlbum = $('<li class="albumLoader">' + data[album].title + '</li>').clone(); var clickAlbum = function() { debug("contents: " + album); }; debug("Album: " + album + "/" + data[album].title); $('.albumlist').append(newAlbum); $(newAlbum).click(clickAlbum); } } Here is a transcript of what it prints when the above function runs, after that are some debug lines caused by me clicking on different items. It always prints "10", which is the last value that the album variable takes (there are 10 albums). Album: 0/Live on radio.electro-music.com Album: 1/Doodles Album: 2/Misc Stuff Album: 3/Drawer Collection Album: 4/Misc Electronic Stuff Album: 5/Odds & Ends Album: 6/Tumbler Album: 7/Bakelit 32 Album: 8/Film Album: 9/Bakelit Album: 10/Slow Zoom/Atomic Heart contents: 10 contents: 10 contents: 10 contents: 10 contents: 10 Any ideas? Driving me up the wall, this is. :) /Stefan

    Read the article

  • Parsing JSON with GSON

    - by Donn Felker
    I'm having some trouble with GSON, mainly deserializing from JSON to a POJO. I have the following JSON: { "events": [ { "event": { "id": 628374485, "title": "Developing for the Windows Phone" } }, { "event": { "id": 765432, "title": "Film Makers Meeting" } } ] } With the following POJO's ... public class EventSearchResult { private List<EventSearchEvent> events; public List<EventSearchEvent> getEvents() { return events; } } public class EventSearchEvent { private int id; private String title; public int getId() { return id; } public String getTitle() { return title; } } ... and I'm deserializing with the following code, where json input is the json above Gson gson = new Gson(); return gson.fromJson(jsonInput, EventSearchResult.class); However, I cannot get the list of events to populate correctly. The title and id are always null. I'm sure I'm missing something, but I'm not sure what. Any idea? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Question about compilers and how they work

    - by Marin Doric
    This is the C code that frees memory of a singly linked list. It is compiled with Visual C++ 2008 and code works as it should be. /* Program done, so free allocated memory */ current = head; struct film * temp; temp = current; while (current != NULL) { temp = current->next; free(current); current = temp; } But I also encountered ( even in a books ) same code written like this: /* Program done, so free allocated memory */ current = head; while (current != NULL) { free(current); current = current->next; } If I compile that code with my VC++ 2008, program crashes because I am first freeing current and then assigning current-next to current. But obviously if I compile this code with some other complier ( for example, compiler that book author used ) program will work. So question is, why does this code compiled with specific compiler work? Is it because that compiler put instructions in binary file that remember address of current-next although I freed current and my VC++ doesn't. I just want to understand how compilers work.

    Read the article

  • Optimization of SQL query regarding pair comparisons

    - by InfiniteSquirrel
    Hi, I'm working on a pair comparison site where a user loads a list of films and grades from another site. My site then picks two random movies and matches them against each other, the user selects the better of the two and a new pair is loaded. This gives a complete list of movies ordered by whichever is best. The database contains three tables; fm_film_data - this contains all imported movies fm_film_data(id int(11), imdb_id varchar(10), tmdb_id varchar(10), title varchar(255), original_title varchar(255), year year(4), director text, description text, poster_url varchar(255)) fm_films - this contains all information related to a user, what movies the user has seen, what grades the user has given, as well as information about each film's wins/losses for that user. fm_films(id int(11), user_id int(11), film_id int(11), grade int(11), wins int(11), losses int(11)) fm_log - this contains records of every duel that has occurred. fm_log(id int(11), user_id int(11), winner int(11), loser int(11)) To pick a pair to show the user, I've created a mySQL query that checks the log and picks a pair at random. SELECT pair.id1, pair.id2 FROM (SELECT part1.id AS id1, part2.id AS id2 FROM fm_films AS part1, fm_films AS part2 WHERE part1.id <> part2.id AND part1.user_id = [!!USERID!!] AND part2.user_id = [!!USERID!!]) AS pair LEFT JOIN (SELECT winner AS id1, loser AS id2 FROM fm_log WHERE fm_log.user_id = [!!USERID!!] UNION SELECT loser AS id1, winner AS id2 FROM fm_log WHERE fm_log.user_id = [!!USERID!!]) AS log ON pair.id1 = log.id1 AND pair.id2 = log.id2 WHERE log.id1 IS NULL ORDER BY RAND() LIMIT 1 This query takes some time to load, about 6 seconds in our tests with two users with about 800 grades each. I'm looking for a way to optimize this but still limit all duels to appear only once. The server runs MySQL version 5.0.90-community.

    Read the article

  • Home based business would like customers to schedule via website the time, day and date they want to take a class.

    - by Alessandro Machi
    I'm using google blogger. I want to ad thumbnail images of different classes I will be offering in my home film/video/sound/lighting studio. The idea is the prospective student visits my website, sees a class they want to take, clicks the thumbnail so first read a descriptive article about the class, at which point they can schedule the class for the time, day, and date of their choosing between the hours of 5am to 9pm, 365 days a year. As soon as the student has inputed the time, day and date of the class they want, they would go to a check out page to purchase the class time. The student would then be sent an email confirmation along with the exact location, the class name, and the time and date they selected. I was thinking of using Dwolla for the check out page because Dwolla offers either no fee or 25 cents per payment transaction, but I'm not sure I can hook up to them easily enough. My blog site is not finished by a longshot. I still have to actually input all of the class thumbnail images along with descriptions, but if you need to see what the page looks like the web address is http://www.myalexlogic.com Google blogger allows for third party code to be added within movable gadgets.

    Read the article

  • The perverse hangman problem

    - by Shalmanese
    Perverse Hangman is a game played much like regular Hangman with one important difference: The winning word is determined dynamically by the house depending on what letters have been guessed. For example, say you have the board _ A I L and 12 remaining guesses. Because there are 13 different words ending in AIL (bail, fail, hail, jail, kail, mail, nail, pail, rail, sail, tail, vail, wail) the house is guaranteed to win because no matter what 12 letters you guess, the house will claim the chosen word was the one you didn't guess. However, if the board was _ I L M, you have cornered the house as FILM is the only word that ends in ILM. The challenge is: Given a dictionary, a word length & the number of allowed guesses, come up with an algorithm that either: a) proves that the player always wins by outputting a decision tree for the player that corners the house no matter what b) proves the house always wins by outputting a decision tree for the house that allows the house to escape no matter what. As a toy example, consider the dictionary: bat bar car If you are allowed 3 wrong guesses, the player wins with the following tree: Guess B NO -> Guess C, Guess A, Guess R, WIN YES-> Guess T NO -> Guess A, Guess R, WIN YES-> Guess A, WIN

    Read the article

  • PHP - Undefined index error

    - by user1815290
    This is my form with a file input field named "photo": <form action = "spremi-film.php" method = "POST" enctype = "multipart/form-data"> <div class="grid_2">Naslov:</div> <div class="grid_10"><input type="text" name="naslov" value="" /></div> <div class="grid_2">Žanr: </div> <div class="grid_10"><?php izborZanra(); ?></div> <div class="grid_2">Godina: </div> <div class="grid_10"><?php izborGodine(); ?></div> <div class="grid_2">Trajanje:</div> <div class="grid_10"><input type="text" name="trajanje" value="" /></div> <div class="grid_2">Izbor slike:</div> <!--<input type="hidden" name="MAX_FILE_SIZE" value="30000" />--> <div class="grid_10"><input type="file" name="photo" /></div> <div class="grid_12"><input type="submit" value="SPREMI" /></div> </form> After that i put this code: $uploaddir = '/slike'; $uploadfile = $uploaddir . basename($_FILES['photo']['name']); //echo '<pre>'; if(move_uploaded_file($_FILES['photo']['tmp_name'], $uploadfile)) { echo 'Slika je uspješno spremljena!'; } else { echo 'Slika nije spremljena!'; } //print_r($_FILES); //echo '</pre>'; When i run this i have an undefined index: photo notice in my browser. Help, please.

    Read the article

  • How can I convert XML files to one CSV file in C#?

    - by TruMan1
    I have a collection of strings that are XML content. I want to iterate thru my collection and build a CSV file to stream to the user for download (sometimes it can be hundreds in the collection). This is my loop: foreach (string response in items.Responses) { string xmlResponse = response; //BUILD CSV HERE } This is what my XML content looks like for each iteration (xmlResponse). I want to put it in a flat file including the "properties" attributes: <?xml version="1.0"?> <response> <properties id="60375c90-9dd7-400f-aafb-a8726df409a9" name="Account Request" date="Thursday, March 04, 2010 2:14:07 PM" page="http://mydomain/sitefinity/CreateAccount.aspx" ip="192.168.1.255" browser="Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100202 Firefox/3.5.8" referrer="http://mydomain/sitefinity/CreateAccount.aspx" confirmation="True" subject="Email from website: Account Request Form" sender="[email protected]" recipients="[email protected], , " /> <fields> <field> <label>Personal Details</label> <value>Personal Details</value> </field> <field> <label>Name</label> <value>Tim Wales</value> </field> <field> <label>Email</label> <value>[email protected]</value> </field> <field> <label>Website</label> <value></value> </field> <field> <label>Password</label> <value></value> </field> <field> <label>Phone</label> <value></value> </field> <field> <label>Years in Business</label> <value></value> </field> <field> <label>Background</label> <value>Background</value> </field> <field> <label>Place of Birth</label> <value>Earth</value> </field> <field> <label>Date of Birth</label> <value></value> </field> <field> <label>Some Label</label> <value>Some Label</value> </field> <field> <label>Industry</label> <value> Technology Other</value> </field> <field> <label>Pets</label> <value>Dog</value> </field> <field> <label>Your View</label> <value>Positive</value> </field> <field> <label>Misc</label> <value>Misc</value> </field> <field> <label>Comments</label> <value></value> </field> <field> <label>Agree to Terms?</label> <value>True</value> </field> </fields> </response> <?xml version="1.0"?> <response> <properties id="60375c90-9dd7-400f-aafb-a8726df409a9" Form="Account Request" Date="Tuesday, March 16, 2010 6:21:07 PM" Page="http://mydomain/sitefinity/Home.aspx" IP="fe80::1c0f57:9ee3%10" Browser="Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 6.0; Trident/4.0; SLCC1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; InfoPath.2; .NET CLR 3.5.21022; .NET CLR 3.5.30729; .NET CLR 3.0.30729)" Referrer="http://mydomain/sitefinity/Home.aspx" Subject="Email from website: Account Request Form" Sender="[email protected]" Recipients="[email protected]" Confirmation="True" /> <fields> <field> <label>Personal Details</label> <value>Personal Details</value> </field> <field> <label>Name</label> <value>erger</value> </field> <field> <label>Email</label> <value></value> </field> <field> <label>Website</label> <value></value> </field> <field> <label>Password</label> <value></value> </field> <field> <label>Phone</label> <value></value> </field> <field> <label>Years in Business</label> <value></value> </field> <field> <label>Background</label> <value>Background</value> </field> <field> <label>Place of Birth</label> <value>Earth</value> </field> <field> <label>Date of Birth</label> <value></value> </field> <field> <label>Some Label</label> <value>Some Label</value> </field> <field> <label>Industry</label> <value> Technology Service</value> </field> <field> <label>Pets</label> <value>Dog</value> </field> <field> <label>Your View</label> <value>Positive</value> </field> <field> <label>Misc</label> <value>Misc</value> </field> <field> <label>Comments</label> <value></value> </field> <field> <label>Agree to Terms?</label> <value>True</value> </field> </fields> </response> <?xml version="1.0"?> <response> <properties id="60375c90-9dd7-400f-aafb-a8726df409a9" Form="Account Request" Date="Tuesday, March 16, 2010 4:50:17 PM" Page="http://mydomain/sitefinity/Home.aspx" IP="fe80::1c0f:ee3%10" Browser="Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 6.0; Trident/4.0; SLCC1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; InfoPath.2; .NET CLR 3.5.21022; .NET CLR 3.5.30729; .NET CLR 3.0.30729)" Referrer="http://mydomain/sitefinity/Home.aspx" Subject="Email from website: Account Request Form" Sender="[email protected]" Recipients="[email protected]" Confirmation="True" /> <fields> <field> <label>Personal Details</label> <value>Personal Details</value> </field> <field> <label>Name</label> <value>esfs</value> </field> <field> <label>Email</label> <value></value> </field> <field> <label>Website</label> <value></value> </field> <field> <label>Password</label> <value></value> </field> <field> <label>Phone</label> <value></value> </field> <field> <label>Years in Business</label> <value></value> </field> <field> <label>Background</label> <value>Background</value> </field> <field> <label>Place of Birth</label> <value>Earth</value> </field> <field> <label>Date of Birth</label> <value></value> </field> <field> <label>Some Label</label> <value>Some Label</value> </field> <field> <label>Industry</label> <value> Technology Service</value> </field> <field> <label>Pets</label> <value>Dog</value> </field> <field> <label>Your View</label> <value>Positive</value> </field> <field> <label>Misc</label> <value>Misc</value> </field> <field> <label>Comments</label> <value></value> </field> <field> <label>Agree to Terms?</label> <value>True</value> </field> </fields> </response> Can anyone help with this?

    Read the article

  • Best RAID setup for multimedia fileserver?

    - by Mr. Schwabe
    I'm building a fileserver for my small office. We do film and multimedia design. Only 3 clients connected. The server is primarily for local access to graphic assets and video files. I'm looking for advice on hardware and software required. Particularly for the RAID. I have the following objectives: A) merged capacity I'd like all other systems to access the data as a single mapped network drive that has an initial capacity of 10 TB. So perhaps 5x 2TB drives (plus mirror drives for redundancy). B) easy way to increase capacity Thinking long term, I'd like to 'easily' add more drives to the array for a potential two or three fold increase in capacity. So theoretically it could get upto a 30 TB raid array consisting of maybe 15x 2 TB drives of capacity (plus mirror drives for redundancy). C) maximum fault tolerance I want at least 1 mirror drive per capacity drive (in laymen's terms). So if I start with 10 TB / 5x 2TB of capacity, I suppose I would need another another 5x 2TB drives to be mirrors. So 10 drives total. But I'd also like potential for even more redundancy; with upto 2 additional mirrors per 'capacity drive' (and to be able to add them to the array anytime with ease). D) easy way to monitor drive health I'd like an intuitive interface for managing the raid and monitoring drive health The other systems accessing this network drive will be running Windows, but also the odd Ubuntu and MacOS system as well. Are these objectives attainable? What type of RAID setup do you recommend? What hardware will be required? Also what OS do you think this system should be running? Does it really matter? I'm no network admin - just a long time Windoze user, without much Linux experience. That said, I'm not opposed to a Linux solution if it's easy enough and more practical than a Windows OS for this server. Or maybe something such as Openfiler. Budget should hit the sweet spot for value and performance (hence my preference to use 2TB drives). The biggest focus is storage; aside from that the system just needs to keep the drives running optimally with perhaps 2 or 3 clients accessing / writing files at any given time. The hardware quote would start with something like 10x 2TB WD Caviar Blacks; about $1900 for the storage + $x for remaining parts. http://ncix.com/products/index.php?sku=42775&vpn=WD2001FASS&manufacture=Western%20Digital%20WD Your advice is appreciated, thanks!

    Read the article

  • Enterprise Process Maps: A Process Picture worth a Million Words

    - by raul.goycoolea
    p { margin-bottom: 0.08in; }h1 { margin-top: 0.33in; margin-bottom: 0in; color: rgb(54, 95, 145); page-break-inside: avoid; }h1.western { font-family: "Cambria",serif; font-size: 14pt; }h1.cjk { font-family: "DejaVu Sans"; font-size: 14pt; }h1.ctl { font-size: 14pt; } Getting Started with Business Transformations A well-known proverb states that "A picture is worth a thousand words." In relation to Business Process Management (BPM), a credible analyst might have a few questions. What if the picture was taken from some particular angle, like directly overhead? What if it was taken from only an inch away or a mile away? What if the photographer did not focus the camera correctly? Does the value of the picture depend on who is looking at it? Enterprise Process Maps are analogous in this sense of relative value. Every BPM project (holistic BPM kick-off, enterprise system implementation, Service-oriented Architecture, business process transformation, corporate performance management, etc.) should be begin with a clear understanding of the business environment, from the biggest picture representations down to the lowest level required or desired for the particular project type, scope and objectives. The Enterprise Process Map serves as an entry point for the process architecture and is defined: the single highest level of process mapping for an organization. It is constructed and evaluated during the Strategy Phase of the Business Process Management Lifecycle. (see Figure 1) Fig. 1: Business Process Management Lifecycle Many organizations view such maps as visual abstractions, constructed for the single purpose of process categorization. This, in turn, results in a lesser focus on the inherent intricacies of the Enterprise Process view, which are explored in the course of this paper. With the main focus of a large scale process documentation effort usually underlying an ERP or other system implementation, it is common for the work to be driven by the desire to "get to the details," and to the type of modeling that will derive near-term tangible results. For instance, a project in American Pharmaceutical Company X is driven by the Director of IT. With 120+ systems in place, and a lack of standardized processes across the United States, he and the VP of IT have decided to embark on a long-term ERP implementation. At the forethought of both are questions, such as: How does my application architecture map to the business? What are each application's functionalities, and where do the business processes utilize them? Where can we retire legacy systems? Well-developed BPM methodologies prescribe numerous model types to capture such information and allow for thorough analysis in these areas. Process to application maps, Event Driven Process Chains, etc. provide this level of detail and facilitate the completion of such project-specific questions. These models and such analysis are appropriately carried out at a relatively low level of process detail. (see figure 2) Fig. 2: The Level Concept, Generic Process HierarchySome of the questions remaining are ones of documentation longevity, the continuation of BPM practice in the organization, process governance and ownership, process transparency and clarity in business process objectives and strategy. The Level Concept in Brief Figure 2 shows a generic, four-level process hierarchy depicting the breakdown of a "Process Area" into progressively more detailed process classifications. The number of levels and the names of these levels are flexible, and can be fit to the standards of the organization's chosen terminology or any other chosen reference model that makes logical sense for both short and long term process description. It is at Level 1 (in this case the Process Area level), that the Enterprise Process Map is created. This map and its contained objects become the foundation for a top-down approach to subsequent mapping, object relationship development, and analysis of the organization's processes and its supporting infrastructure. Additionally, this picture serves as a communication device, at an executive level, describing the design of the business in its service to a customer. It seems, then, imperative that the process development effort, and this map, start off on the right foot. Figuring out just what that right foot is, however, is critical and trend-setting in an evolving organization. Key Considerations Enterprise Process Maps are usually not as living and breathing as other process maps. Just as it would be an extremely difficult task to change the foundation of the Sears Tower or a city plan for the entire city of Chicago, the Enterprise Process view of an organization usually remains unchanged once developed (unless, of course, an organization is at a stage where it is capable of true, high-level process innovation). Regardless, the Enterprise Process map is a key first step, and one that must be taken in a precise way. What makes this groundwork solid depends on not only the materials used to construct it (process areas), but also the layout plan and knowledge base of what will be built (the entire process architecture). It seems reasonable that care and consideration are required to create this critical high level map... but what are the important factors? Does the process modeler need to worry about how many process areas there are? About who is looking at it? Should he only use the color pink because it's his boss' favorite color? Interestingly, and perhaps surprisingly, these are all valid considerations that may just require a bit of structure. Below are Three Key Factors to consider when building an Enterprise Process Map: Company Strategic Focus Process Categorization: Customer is Core End-to-end versus Functional Processes Company Strategic Focus As mentioned above, the Enterprise Process Map is created during the Strategy Phase of the Business Process Management Lifecycle. From Oracle Business Process Management methodology for business transformation, it is apparent that business processes exist for the purpose of achieving the strategic objectives of an organization. In a prescribed, top-down approach to process development, it must be ensured that each process fulfills its objectives, and in an aggregated manner, drives fulfillment of the strategic objectives of the company, whether for particular business segments or in a broader sense. This is a crucial point, as the strategic messages of the company must therefore resound in its process maps, in particular one that spans the processes of the complete business: the Enterprise Process Map. One simple example from Company X is shown below (see figure 3). Fig. 3: Company X Enterprise Process Map In reviewing Company X's Enterprise Process Map, one can immediately begin to understand the general strategic mindset of the organization. It shows that Company X is focused on its customers, defining 10 of its process areas belonging to customer-focused categories. Additionally, the organization views these end-customer-oriented process areas as part of customer-fulfilling value chains, while support process areas do not provide as much contiguous value. However, by including both support and strategic process categorizations, it becomes apparent that all processes are considered vital to the success of the customer-oriented focus processes. Below is an example from Company Y (see figure 4). Fig. 4: Company Y Enterprise Process Map Company Y, although also a customer-oriented company, sends a differently focused message with its depiction of the Enterprise Process Map. Along the top of the map is the company's product tree, overarching the process areas, which when executed deliver the products themselves. This indicates one strategic objective of excellence in product quality. Additionally, the view represents a less linear value chain, with strong overlaps of the various process areas. Marketing and quality management are seen as a key support processes, as they span the process lifecycle. Often, companies may incorporate graphics, logos and symbols representing customers and suppliers, and other objects to truly send the strategic message to the business. Other times, Enterprise Process Maps may show high level of responsibility to organizational units, or the application types that support the process areas. It is possible that hundreds of formats and focuses can be applied to an Enterprise Process Map. What is of vital importance, however, is which formats and focuses are chosen to truly represent the direction of the company, and serve as a driver for focusing the business on the strategic objectives set forth in that right. Process Categorization: Customer is Core In the previous two examples, processes were grouped using differing categories and techniques. Company X showed one support and three customer process categorizations using encompassing chevron objects; Customer Y achieved a less distinct categorization using a gradual color scheme. Either way, and in general, modeling of the process areas becomes even more valuable and easily understood within the context of business categorization, be it strategic or otherwise. But how one categorizes their processes is typically more complex than simply choosing object shapes and colors. Previously, it was stated that the ideal is a prescribed top-down approach to developing processes, to make certain linkages all the way back up to corporate strategy. But what about external influences? What forces push and pull corporate strategy? Industry maturity, product lifecycle, market profitability, competition, etc. can all drive the critical success factors of a particular business segment, or the company as a whole, in addition to previous corporate strategy. This may seem to be turning into a discussion of theory, but that is far from the case. In fact, in years of recent study and evolution of the way businesses operate, cross-industry and across the globe, one invariable has surfaced with such strength to make it undeniable in the game plan of any strategy fit for survival. That constant is the customer. Many of a company's critical success factors, in any business segment, relate to the customer: customer retention, satisfaction, loyalty, etc. Businesses serve customers, and so do a business's processes, mapped or unmapped. The most effective way to categorize processes is in a manner that visualizes convergence to what is core for a company. It is the value chain, beginning with the customer in mind, and ending with the fulfillment of that customer, that becomes the core or the centerpiece of the Enterprise Process Map. (See figure 5) Fig. 5: Company Z Enterprise Process Map Company Z has what may be viewed as several different perspectives or "cuts" baked into their Enterprise Process Map. It has divided its processes into three main categories (top, middle, and bottom) of Management Processes, the Core Value Chain and Supporting Processes. The Core category begins with Corporate Marketing (which contains the activities of beginning to engage customers) and ends with Customer Service Management. Within the value chain, this company has divided into the focus areas of their two primary business lines, Foods and Beverages. Does this mean that areas, such as Strategy, Information Management or Project Management are not as important as those in the Core category? No! In some cases, though, depending on the organization's understanding of high-level BPM concepts, use of category names, such as "Core," "Management" or "Support," can be a touchy subject. What is important to understand, is that no matter the nomenclature chosen, the Core processes are those that drive directly to customer value, Support processes are those which make the Core processes possible to execute, and Management Processes are those which steer and influence the Core. Some common terms for these three basic categorizations are Core, Customer Fulfillment, Customer Relationship Management, Governing, Controlling, Enabling, Support, etc. End-to-end versus Functional Processes Every high and low level of process: function, task, activity, process/work step (whatever an organization calls it), should add value to the flow of business in an organization. Suppose that within the process "Deliver package," there is a documented task titled "Stop for ice cream." It doesn't take a process expert to deduce the room for improvement. Though stopping for ice cream may create gain for the one person performing it, it likely benefits neither the organization nor, more importantly, the customer. In most cases, "Stop for ice cream" wouldn't make it past the first pass of To-Be process development. What would make the cut, however, would be a flow of tasks that, each having their own value add, build up to greater and greater levels of process objective. In this case, those tasks would combine to achieve a status of "package delivered." Figure 3 shows a simple example: Just as the package can only be delivered (outcome of the process) without first being retrieved, loaded, and the travel destination reached (outcomes of the process steps), some higher level of process "Play Practical Joke" (e.g., main process or process area) cannot be completed until a package is delivered. It seems that isolated or functionally separated processes, such as "Deliver Package" (shown in Figure 6), are necessary, but are always part of a bigger value chain. Each of these individual processes must be analyzed within the context of that value chain in order to ensure successful end-to-end process performance. For example, this company's "Create Joke Package" process could be operating flawlessly and efficiently, but if a joke is never developed, it cannot be created, so the end-to-end process breaks. Fig. 6: End to End Process Construction That being recognized, it is clear that processes must be viewed as end-to-end, customer-to-customer, and in the context of company strategy. But as can also be seen from the previous example, these vital end-to-end processes cannot be built without the functionally oriented building blocks. Without one, the other cannot be had, or at least not in a complete and organized fashion. As it turns out, but not discussed in depth here, the process modeling effort, BPM organizational development, and comprehensive coverage cannot be fully realized without a semi-functional, process-oriented approach. Then, an Enterprise Process Map should be concerned with both views, the building blocks, and access points to the business-critical end-to-end processes, which they construct. Without the functional building blocks, all streams of work needed for any business transformation would be lost mess of process disorganization. End-to-end views are essential for utilization in optimization in context, understanding customer impacts, base-lining all project phases and aligning objectives. Including both views on an Enterprise Process Map allows management to understand the functional orientation of the company's processes, while still providing access to end-to-end processes, which are most valuable to them. (See figures 7 and 8). Fig. 7: Simplified Enterprise Process Map with end-to-end Access Point The above examples show two unique ways to achieve a successful Enterprise Process Map. The first example is a simple map that shows a high level set of process areas and a separate section with the end-to-end processes of concern for the organization. This particular map is filtered to show just one vital end-to-end process for a project-specific focus. Fig. 8: Detailed Enterprise Process Map showing connected Functional Processes The second example shows a more complex arrangement and categorization of functional processes (the names of each process area has been removed). The end-to-end perspective is achieved at this level through the connections (interfaces at lower levels) between these functional process areas. An important point to note is that the organization of these two views of the Enterprise Process Map is dependent, in large part, on the orientation of its audience, and the complexity of the landscape at the highest level. If both are not apparent, the Enterprise Process Map is missing an opportunity to serve as a holistic, high-level view. Conclusion In the world of BPM, and specifically regarding Enterprise Process Maps, a picture can be worth as many words as the thought and effort that is put into it. Enterprise Process Maps alone cannot change an organization, but they serve more purposes than initially meet the eye, and therefore must be designed in a way that enables a BPM mindset, business process understanding and business transformation efforts. Every Enterprise Process Map will and should be different when looking across organizations. Its design will be driven by company strategy, a level of customer focus, and functional versus end-to-end orientations. This high-level description of the considerations of the Enterprise Process Maps is not a prescriptive "how to" guide. However, a company attempting to create one may not have the practical BPM experience to truly explore its options or impacts to the coming work of business process transformation. The biggest takeaway is that process modeling, at all levels, is a science and an art, and art is open to interpretation. It is critical that the modeler of the highest level of process mapping be a cognoscente of the message he is delivering and the factors at hand. Without sufficient focus on the design of the Enterprise Process Map, an entire BPM effort may suffer. For additional information please check: Oracle Business Process Management.

    Read the article

  • Laissez les bon temps rouler! (Microsoft BI Conference 2010)

    - by smisner
    "Laissez les bons temps rouler" is a Cajun phrase that I heard frequently when I lived in New Orleans in the mid-1990s. It means "Let the good times roll!" and encapsulates a feeling of happy expectation. As I met with many of my peers and new acquaintances at the Microsoft BI Conference last week, this phrase kept running through my mind as people spoke about their plans in their respective businesses, the benefits and opportunities that the recent releases in the BI stack are providing, and their expectations about the future of the BI stack. Notwithstanding some jabs here and there to point out the platform is neither perfect now nor will be anytime soon (along with admissions that the competitors are also not perfect), and notwithstanding several missteps by the event organizers (which I don't care to enumerate), the overarching mood at the conference was positive. It was a refreshing change from the doom and gloom hovering over several conferences that I attended in 2009. Although many people expect economic hardships to continue over the coming year or so, everyone I know in the BI field is busier than ever and expects to stay busy for quite a while. Self-Service BI Self-service was definitely a theme of the BI conference. In the keynote, Ted Kummert opened with a look back to a fairy tale vision of self-service BI that he told in 2008. At that time, the fairy tale future was a time when "every end user was able to use BI technologies within their job in order to move forward more effectively" and transitioned to the present time in which SQL Server 2008 R2, Office 2010, and SharePoint 2010 are available to deliver managed self-service BI. This set of technologies is presumably poised to address the needs of the 80% of users that Kummert said do not use BI today. He proceeded to outline a series of activities that users ought to be able to do themselves--from simple changes to a report like formatting or an addtional data visualization to integration of an additional data source. The keynote then continued with a series of demonstrations of both current and future technology in support of self-service BI. Some highlights that interested me: PowerPivot, of course, is the flagship product for self-service BI in the Microsoft BI stack. In the TechEd keynote, which was open to the BI conference attendees, Amir Netz (twitter) impressed the audience by demonstrating interactivity with a workbook containing 100 million rows. He upped the ante at the BI keynote with his demonstration of a future-state PowerPivot workbook containing over 2 billion records. It's important to note that this volume of data is being processed by a server engine, and not in the PowerPivot client engine. (Yes, I think it's impressive, but none of my clients are typically wrangling with 2 billion records at a time. Maybe they're thinking too small. This ability to work quickly with large data sets has greater implications for BI solutions than for self-service BI, in my opinion.) Amir also demonstrated KPIs for the future PowerPivot, which appeared to be easier to implement than in any other Microsoft product that supports KPIs, apart from simple KPIs in SharePoint. (My initial reaction is that we have one more place to build KPIs. Great. It's confusing enough. I haven't seen how well those KPIs integrate with other BI tools, which will be important for adoption.) One more PowerPivot feature that Amir showed was a graphical display of the lineage for calculations. (This is hugely practical, especially if you build up calculations incrementally. You can more easily follow the logic from calculation to calculation. Furthermore, if you need to make a change to one calculation, you can assess the impact on other calculations.) Another product demonstration will be available within the next 30 days--Pivot for Reporting Services. If you haven't seen this technology yet, check it out at www.getpivot.com. (It definitely has a wow factor, but I'm skeptical about its practicality. However, I'm looking forward to trying it out with data that I understand.) Michael Tejedor (twitter) demonstrated a feature that I think is really interesting and not emphasized nearly enough--overshadowed by PowerPivot, no doubt. That feature is the Microsoft Business Intelligence Indexing Connector, which enables search of the content of Excel workbooks and Reporting Services reports. (This capability existed in MOSS 2007, but was more cumbersome to implement. The search results in SharePoint 2010 are not only cooler, but more useful by describing whether the content is found in a table or a chart, for example.) This may yet be the dawning of the age of self-service BI - a phrase I've heard repeated from time to time over the last decade - but I think BI professionals are likely to stay busy for a long while, and need not start looking for a new line of work. Kummert repeatedly referenced strategic BI solutions in contrast to self-service BI to emphasize that self-service BI is not a replacement for the services that BI professionals provide. After all, self-service BI does not appear magically on user desktops (or whatever device they want to use). A supporting infrastructure is necessary, and grows in complexity in proportion to the need to simplify BI for users. It's one thing to hear the party line touted by Microsoft employees at the BI keynote, but it's another to hear from the people who are responsible for implementing and supporting it within an organization. Rob Collie (blog | twitter), Kasper de Jonge (blog | twitter), Vidas Matelis (site | twitter), and I were invited to join Andrew Brust (blog | twitter) as he led a Birds of a Feather session at TechEd entitled "PowerPivot: Is It the BI Deal-Changer for Developers and IT Pros?" I would single out the prevailing concern in this session as the issue of control. On one side of this issue were those who were concerned that they would lose control once PowerPivot is implemented. On the other side were those who believed that data should be freely accessible to users in PowerPivot, and even acknowledgment that users would get the data they want even if it meant they would have to manually enter into a workbook to have it ready for analysis. For another viewpoint on how PowerPivot played out at the conference, see Rob Collie's observations. Collaborative BI I have been intrigued by the notion of collaborative BI for a very long time. Before I discovered BI, I was a Lotus Notes developer and later a manager of developers, working in a software company that enabled collaboration in the legal industry. Not only did I help create collaborative systems for our clients, I created a complete project management from the ground up to collaboratively manage our custom development work. In that case, collaboration involved my team, my client contacts, and me. I was also able to produce my own BI from that system as well, but didn't know that's what I was doing at the time. Only in recent years has SharePoint begun to catch up with the capabilities that I had with Lotus Notes more than a decade ago. Eventually, I had the opportunity at that job to formally investigate BI as another product offering for our software, and the rest - as they say - is history. I built my first data warehouse with Scott Cameron (who has also ventured into the authoring world by writing Analysis Services 2008 Step by Step and was at the BI Conference last week where I got to reminisce with him for a bit) and that began a career that I never imagined at the time. Fast forward to 2010, and I'm still lauding the virtues of collaborative BI, if only the tools will catch up to my vision! Thus, I was anxious to see what Donald Farmer (blog | twitter) and Rita Sallam of Gartner had to say on the subject in their session "Collaborative Decision Making." As I suspected, the tools aren't quite there yet, but the vendors are moving in the right direction. One thing I liked about this session was a non-Microsoft perspective of the state of the industry with regard to collaborative BI. In addition, this session included a better demonstration of SharePoint collaborative BI capabilities than appeared in the BI keynote. Check out the video in the link to the session to see the demonstration. One of the use cases that was demonstrated was linking from information to a person, because, as Donald put it, "People don't trust data, they trust people." The Microsoft BI Stack in General A question I hear all the time from students when I'm teaching is how to know what tools to use when there is overlap between products in the BI stack. I've never taken the time to codify my thoughts on the subject, but saw that my friend Dan Bulos provided good insight on this topic from a variety of perspectives in his session, "So Many BI Tools, So Little Time." I thought one of his best points was that ideally you should be able to design in your tool of choice, and then deploy to your tool of choice. Unfortunately, the ideal is yet to become real across the platform. The closest we come is with the RDL in Reporting Services which can be produced from two different tools (Report Builder or Business Intelligence Development Studio's Report Designer), manually, or by a third-party or custom application. I have touted the idea for years (and publicly said so about 5 years ago) that eventually more products would be RDL producers or consumers, but we aren't there yet. Maybe in another 5 years. Another interesting session that covered the BI stack against a backdrop of competitive products was delivered by Andrew Brust. Andrew did a marvelous job of consolidating a lot of information in a way that clearly communicated how various vendors' offerings compared to the Microsoft BI stack. He also made a particularly compelling argument about how the existence of an ecosystem around the Microsoft BI stack provided innovation and opportunities lacking for other vendors. Check out his presentation, "How Does the Microsoft BI Stack...Stack Up?" Expo Hall I had planned to spend more time in the Expo Hall to see who was doing new things with the BI stack, but didn't manage to get very far. Each time I set out on an exploratory mission, I got caught up in some fascinating conversations with one or more of my peers. I find interacting with people that I meet at conferences just as important as attending sessions to learn something new. There were a couple of items that really caught me eye, however, that I'll share here. Pragmatic Works. Whether you develop SSIS packages, build SSAS cubes, or author SSRS reports (or all of the above), you really must take a look at BI Documenter. Brian Knight (twitter) walked me through the key features, and I must say I was impressed. Once you've seen what this product can do, you won't want to document your BI projects any other way. You can download a free single-user database edition, or choose from more feature-rich standard or professional editions. Microsoft Press ebooks. I also stopped by the O'Reilly Media booth to meet some folks that one of my acquisitions editors at Microsoft Press recommended. In case you haven't heard, Microsoft Press has partnered with O'Reilly Media for distribution and publishing. Apart from my interest in learning more about O'Reilly Media as an author, an advertisement in their booth caught me eye which I think is a really great move. When you buy Microsoft Press ebooks through the O'Reilly web site, you can receive it in any (or all) of the following formats where possible: PDF, epub, .mobi for Kindle and .apk for Android. You also have lifetime DRM-free access to the ebooks. As someone who is an avid collector of books, I fnd myself running out of room for storage. In addition, I travel a lot, and it's hard to lug my reference library with me. Today's e-reader options make the move to digital books a more viable way to grow my library. Having a variety of formats means I am not limited to a single device, and lifetime access means I don't have to worry about keeping track of where I've stored my files. Because the e-books are DRM-free, I can copy and paste when I'm compiling notes, and I can print pages when necessary. That's a winning combination in my mind! Overall, I was pleased with the BI conference. There were many more sessions that I couldn't attend, either because the room was full when I got there or there were multiple sessions running concurrently that I wanted to see. Fortunately, many of the sessions are accessible for viewing online at http://www.msteched.com/2010/NorthAmerica along with the TechEd sessions. You can spot the BI sessions by the yellow skyline on the title slide of the presentation as shown below. Share this post: email it! | bookmark it! | digg it! | reddit! | kick it! | live it!

    Read the article

  • VS 2012 Code Review &ndash; Before Check In OR After Check In?

    - by Tarun Arora
    “Is Code Review Important and Effective?” There is a consensus across the industry that code review is an effective and practical way to collar code inconsistency and possible defects early in the software development life cycle. Among others some of the advantages of code reviews are, Bugs are found faster Forces developers to write readable code (code that can be read without explanation or introduction!) Optimization methods/tricks/productive programs spread faster Programmers as specialists "evolve" faster It's fun “Code review is systematic examination (often known as peer review) of computer source code. It is intended to find and fix mistakes overlooked in the initial development phase, improving both the overall quality of software and the developers' skills. Reviews are done in various forms such as pair programming, informal walkthroughs, and formal inspections.” Wikipedia No where does the definition mention whether its better to review code before the code has been committed to version control or after the commit has been performed. No matter which side you favour, Visual Studio 2012 allows you to request for a code review both before check in and also request for a review after check in. Let’s weigh the pros and cons of the approaches independently. Code Review Before Check In or Code Review After Check In? Approach 1 – Code Review before Check in Developer completes the code and feels the code quality is appropriate for check in to TFS. The developer raises a code review request to have a second pair of eyes validate if the code abides to the recommended best practices, will not result in any defects due to common coding mistakes and whether any optimizations can be made to improve the code quality.                                             Image 1 – code review before check in Pros Everything that gets committed to source control is reviewed. Minimizes the chances of smelly code making its way into the code base. Decreases the cost of fixing bugs, remember, the earlier you find them, the lesser the pain in fixing them. Cons Development Code Freeze – Since the changes aren’t in the source control yet. Further development can only be done off-line. The changes have not been through a CI build, hard to say whether the code abides to all build quality standards. Inconsistent! Cumbersome to track the actual code review process.  Not every change to the code base is worth reviewing, a lot of effort is invested for very little gain. Approach 2 – Code Review after Check in Developer checks in, random code reviews are performed on the checked in code.                                                      Image 2 – Code review after check in Pros The code has already passed the CI build and run through any code analysis plug ins you may have running on the build server. Instruct the developer to ensure ZERO fx cop, style cop and static code analysis before check in. Code is cleaner and smell free even before the code review. No Offline development, developers can continue to develop against the source control. Cons Bad code can easily make its way into the code base. Since the review take place much later in the cycle, the cost of fixing issues can prove to be much higher. Approach 3 – Hybrid Approach The community advocates a more hybrid approach, a blend of tooling and human accountability quotient.                                                               Image 3 – Hybrid Approach 1. Code review high impact check ins. It is not possible to review everything, by setting up code review check in policies you can end up slowing your team. More over, the code that you are reviewing before check in hasn't even been through a green CI build either. 2. Tooling. Let the tooling work for you. By running static analysis, fx cop, style cop and other plug ins on the build agent, you can identify the real issues that in my opinion can't possibly be identified using human reviews. Configure the tooling to report back top 10 issues every day. Mandate the manual code review of individuals who keep making it to this list of shame more often. 3. During Merge. I would prefer eliminating some of the other code issues during merge from Main branch to the release branch. In a scrum project this is still easier because cheery picking the merges is a possibility and the size of code being reviewed is still limited. Let the tooling work for you, if some one breaks the CI build often, put them on a gated check in build course until you see improvement. If some one appears on the top 10 list of shame generated via the build then ensure that all their code is reviewed till you see improvement. At the end of the day, the goal is to ensure that the code being delivered is top quality. By enforcing a code review before any check in, you force the developer to work offline or stay put till the review is complete. What do the experts say? So I asked a few expects what they thought of “Code Review quality gate before Checking in code?" Terje Sandstrom | Microsoft ALM MVP You mean a review quality gate BEFORE checking in code????? That would mean a lot of code staying either local or in shelvesets, and not even been through a CI build, and a green CI build being the main criteria for going further, f.e. to the review state. I would not like code laying around with no checkin’s. Having a requirement that code is checked in small pieces, 4-8 hours work max, and AT LEAST daily checkins, a manual code review comes second down the lane. I would expect review quality gates to happen before merging back to main, or before merging to release.  But that would all be on checked-in code.  Branching is absolutely one way to ease the pain.   Another way we are using is automatic quality builds, running metrics, coverage, static code analysis.  Unfortunately it takes some time, would be great to be on CI’s – but…., so it’s done scheduled every night. Based on this we get, among other stuff,  top 10 lists of suspicious code, which is then subjected to reviews.  If a person seems to be very popular on these top 10 lists, we subject every check in from that person to a review for a period. That normally helps.   None of the clients I have can afford to have every checkin reviewed, so we need to find ways around it. I don’t disagree with the nicety of having all the code reviewed, but I find it hard to find those resources in today’s enterprises. David V. Corbin | Visual Studio ALM Ranger I tend to agree with both sides. I hate having code that is not checked in, but at the same time hate having “bad” code in the repository. I have found that branching is one approach to solving this dilemma. Code is checked into the private/feature branch before the review, but is not merged over to the “official” branch until after the review. I advocate both, depending on circumstance (especially team dynamics)   - The “pre-checkin” is usually for elements that may impact the project as a whole. Think of it as another “gate” along with passing unit tests. - The “post-checkin” may very well not be at the changeset level, but correlates to a review at the “user story” level.   Again, this depends on team dynamics in play…. Robert MacLean | Microsoft ALM MVP I do not think there is no right answer for the industry as a whole. In short the question is why do you do reviews? Your question implies risk mitigation, so in low risk areas you can get away with it after check in while in high risk you need to do it before check in. An example is those new to a team or juniors need it much earlier (maybe that is before checkin, maybe that is soon after) than seniors who have shipped twenty sprints on the team. Abhimanyu Singhal | Visual Studio ALM Ranger Depends on per scenario basis. We recommend post check-in reviews when: 1. We don't want to block other checks and processes on manual code reviews. Manual reviews take time, and some pieces may not require manual reviews at all. 2. We need to trace all changes and track history. 3. We have a code promotion strategy/process in place. For risk mitigation, post checkin code can be promoted to Accepted branches. Or can be rejected. Pre Checkin Reviews are used when 1. There is a high risk factor associated 2. Reviewers are generally (most of times) have immediate availability. 3. Team does not have strict tracking needs. Simply speaking, no single process fits all scenarios. You need to select what works best for your team/project. Thomas Schissler | Visual Studio ALM Ranger This is an interesting discussion, I’m right now discussing details about executing code reviews with my teams. I see and understand the aspects you brought in, but there is another side as well, I’d like to point out. 1.) If you do reviews per check in this is not very practical as a hard rule because this will disturb the flow of the team very often or it will lead to reduce the checkin frequency of the devs which I would not accept. 2.) If you do later reviews, for example if you review PBIs, it is not easy to find out which code you should review. Either you review all changesets associate with the PBI, but then you might review code which has been changed with a later checkin and the dev maybe has already fixed the issue. Or you review the diff of the latest changeset of the PBI with the first but then you might also review changes of other PBIs. Jakob Leander | Sr. Director, Avanade In my experience, manual code review: 1. Does not get done and at the very least does not get redone after changes (regardless of intentions at start of project) 2. When a project actually do it, they often do not do it right away = errors pile up 3. Requires a lot of time discussing/defining the standard and for the team to learn it However code review is very important since e.g. even small memory leaks in a high volume web solution have big consequences In the last years I have advocated following approach for code review - Architects up front do “at least one best practice example” of each type of component and tell the team. Copy from this one. This should include error handling, logging, security etc. - Dev lead on project continuously browse code to validate that the best practices are used. Especially that patterns etc. are not broken. You can do this formally after each sprint/iteration if you want. Once this is validated it is unlikely to “go bad” even during later code changes Agree with customer to rely on static code analysis from Visual Studio as the one and only coding standard. This has HUUGE benefits - You can easily tweak to reach the level you desire together with customer - It is easy to measure for both developers/management - It is 100% consistent across code base - It gets validated all the time so you never end up getting hammered by a customer review in the end - It is easy to tell the developer that you do not want code back unless it has zero errors = minimize communication You need to track this at least during nightly builds and make sure team sees total # issues. Do not allow #issues it to grow uncontrolled. On the project I run I require code analysis to have run on code before checkin (checkin rule). This means -  You have to have clean compile (or CA wont run) so this is extra benefit = very few broken builds - You can change a few of the rules to compile as errors instead of warnings. I often do this for “missing dispose” issues which you REALLY do not want in your app Tip: Place your custom CA rules files as part of solution. That  way it works when you do branching etc. (path to CA file is relative in VS) Some may argue that CA is not as good as manual inspection. But since manual inspection in reality suffers from the 3 issues in start it is IMO a MUCH better (and much cheaper) approach from helicopter perspective Tirthankar Dutta | Director, Avanade I think code review should be run both before and after check ins. There are some code metrics that are meant to be run on the entire codebase … Also, especially on multi-site projects, one should strive to architect in a way that lets men manage the framework while boys write the repetitive code… scales very well with the need to review less by containment and imposing architectural restrictions to emphasise the design. Bruno Capuano | Microsoft ALM MVP For code reviews (means peer reviews) in distributed team I use http://www.vsanywhere.com/default.aspx  David Jobling | Global Sr. Director, Avanade Peer review is the only way to scale and its a great practice for all in the team to learn to perform and accept. In my experience you soon learn who's code to watch more than others and tune the attention. Mikkel Toudal Kristiansen | Manager, Avanade If you have several branches in your code base, you will need to merge often. This requires manual merging, when a file has been changed in both branches. It offers a good opportunity to actually review to changed code. So my advice is: Merging between branches should be done as often as possible, it should be done by a senior developer, and he/she should perform a full code review of the code being merged. As for detecting architectural smells and code smells creeping into the code base, one really good third party tools exist: Ndepend (http://www.ndepend.com/, for static code analysis of the current state of the code base). You could also consider adding StyleCop to the solution. Jesse Houwing | Visual Studio ALM Ranger I gave a presentation on this subject on the TechDays conference in NL last year. See my presentation and slides here (talk in Dutch, but English presentation): http://blog.jessehouwing.nl/2012/03/did-you-miss-my-techdaysnl-talk-on-code.html  I’d like to add a few more points: - Before/After checking is mostly a trust issue. If you have a team that does diligent peer reviews and regularly talk/sit together or peer review, there’s no need to enforce a before-checkin policy. The peer peer-programming and regular feedback during development can take care of most of the review requirements as long as the team isn’t under stress. - Under stress, enforce pre-checkin reviews, it might sound strange, if you’re already under time or budgetary constraints, but it is under such conditions most real issues start to be created or pile up. - Use tools to catch most common errors, Code Analysis/FxCop was already mentioned. HP Fortify, Resharper, Coderush etc can help you there. There are also a lot of 3rd party rules you can add to Code Analysis. I’ve written a few myself (http://fccopcontrib.codeplex.com) and various teams from Microsoft have added their own rules (MSOCAF for SharePoint, WSSF for WCF). For common errors that keep cropping up, see if you can define a rule. It’s much easier. But more importantly make sure you have a good help page explaining *WHY* it's wrong. If you have small feature or developer branches/shelvesets, you might want to review pre-merge. It’s still better to do peer reviews and peer programming, but the most important thing is that bad quality code doesn’t make it into the important branch. So my philosophy: - Use tooling as much as possible. - Make sure the team understands the tooling and the importance of the things it flags. It’s too easy to just click suppress all to ignore the warnings. - Under stress, tighten process, it’s under stress that the problems of late reviews will really surface - Most importantly if you do reviews do them as early as possible, but never later than needed. In other words, pre-checkin/post checking doesn’t really matter, as long as the review is done before the code is released. It’ll just be much more expensive to fix any review outcomes the later you find them. --- I would love to hear what you think!

    Read the article

  • Laissez les bon temps rouler! (Microsoft BI Conference 2010)

    - by smisner
    Laissez les bons temps rouler" is a Cajun phrase that I heard frequently when I lived in New Orleans in the mid-1990s. It means "Let the good times roll!" and encapsulates a feeling of happy expectation. As I met with many of my peers and new acquaintances at the Microsoft BI Conference last week, this phrase kept running through my mind as people spoke about their plans in their respective businesses, the benefits and opportunities that the recent releases in the BI stack are providing, and their expectations about the future of the BI stack.Notwithstanding some jabs here and there to point out the platform is neither perfect now nor will be anytime soon (along with admissions that the competitors are also not perfect), and notwithstanding several missteps by the event organizers (which I don't care to enumerate), the overarching mood at the conference was positive. It was a refreshing change from the doom and gloom hovering over several conferences that I attended in 2009. Although many people expect economic hardships to continue over the coming year or so, everyone I know in the BI field is busier than ever and expects to stay busy for quite a while.Self-Service BISelf-service was definitely a theme of the BI conference. In the keynote, Ted Kummert opened with a look back to a fairy tale vision of self-service BI that he told in 2008. At that time, the fairy tale future was a time when "every end user was able to use BI technologies within their job in order to move forward more effectively" and transitioned to the present time in which SQL Server 2008 R2, Office 2010, and SharePoint 2010 are available to deliver managed self-service BI.This set of technologies is presumably poised to address the needs of the 80% of users that Kummert said do not use BI today. He proceeded to outline a series of activities that users ought to be able to do themselves--from simple changes to a report like formatting or an addtional data visualization to integration of an additional data source. The keynote then continued with a series of demonstrations of both current and future technology in support of self-service BI. Some highlights that interested me:PowerPivot, of course, is the flagship product for self-service BI in the Microsoft BI stack. In the TechEd keynote, which was open to the BI conference attendees, Amir Netz (twitter) impressed the audience by demonstrating interactivity with a workbook containing 100 million rows. He upped the ante at the BI keynote with his demonstration of a future-state PowerPivot workbook containing over 2 billion records. It's important to note that this volume of data is being processed by a server engine, and not in the PowerPivot client engine. (Yes, I think it's impressive, but none of my clients are typically wrangling with 2 billion records at a time. Maybe they're thinking too small. This ability to work quickly with large data sets has greater implications for BI solutions than for self-service BI, in my opinion.)Amir also demonstrated KPIs for the future PowerPivot, which appeared to be easier to implement than in any other Microsoft product that supports KPIs, apart from simple KPIs in SharePoint. (My initial reaction is that we have one more place to build KPIs. Great. It's confusing enough. I haven't seen how well those KPIs integrate with other BI tools, which will be important for adoption.)One more PowerPivot feature that Amir showed was a graphical display of the lineage for calculations. (This is hugely practical, especially if you build up calculations incrementally. You can more easily follow the logic from calculation to calculation. Furthermore, if you need to make a change to one calculation, you can assess the impact on other calculations.)Another product demonstration will be available within the next 30 days--Pivot for Reporting Services. If you haven't seen this technology yet, check it out at www.getpivot.com. (It definitely has a wow factor, but I'm skeptical about its practicality. However, I'm looking forward to trying it out with data that I understand.)Michael Tejedor (twitter) demonstrated a feature that I think is really interesting and not emphasized nearly enough--overshadowed by PowerPivot, no doubt. That feature is the Microsoft Business Intelligence Indexing Connector, which enables search of the content of Excel workbooks and Reporting Services reports. (This capability existed in MOSS 2007, but was more cumbersome to implement. The search results in SharePoint 2010 are not only cooler, but more useful by describing whether the content is found in a table or a chart, for example.)This may yet be the dawning of the age of self-service BI - a phrase I've heard repeated from time to time over the last decade - but I think BI professionals are likely to stay busy for a long while, and need not start looking for a new line of work. Kummert repeatedly referenced strategic BI solutions in contrast to self-service BI to emphasize that self-service BI is not a replacement for the services that BI professionals provide. After all, self-service BI does not appear magically on user desktops (or whatever device they want to use). A supporting infrastructure is necessary, and grows in complexity in proportion to the need to simplify BI for users.It's one thing to hear the party line touted by Microsoft employees at the BI keynote, but it's another to hear from the people who are responsible for implementing and supporting it within an organization. Rob Collie (blog | twitter), Kasper de Jonge (blog | twitter), Vidas Matelis (site | twitter), and I were invited to join Andrew Brust (blog | twitter) as he led a Birds of a Feather session at TechEd entitled "PowerPivot: Is It the BI Deal-Changer for Developers and IT Pros?" I would single out the prevailing concern in this session as the issue of control. On one side of this issue were those who were concerned that they would lose control once PowerPivot is implemented. On the other side were those who believed that data should be freely accessible to users in PowerPivot, and even acknowledgment that users would get the data they want even if it meant they would have to manually enter into a workbook to have it ready for analysis. For another viewpoint on how PowerPivot played out at the conference, see Rob Collie's observations.Collaborative BII have been intrigued by the notion of collaborative BI for a very long time. Before I discovered BI, I was a Lotus Notes developer and later a manager of developers, working in a software company that enabled collaboration in the legal industry. Not only did I help create collaborative systems for our clients, I created a complete project management from the ground up to collaboratively manage our custom development work. In that case, collaboration involved my team, my client contacts, and me. I was also able to produce my own BI from that system as well, but didn't know that's what I was doing at the time. Only in recent years has SharePoint begun to catch up with the capabilities that I had with Lotus Notes more than a decade ago. Eventually, I had the opportunity at that job to formally investigate BI as another product offering for our software, and the rest - as they say - is history. I built my first data warehouse with Scott Cameron (who has also ventured into the authoring world by writing Analysis Services 2008 Step by Step and was at the BI Conference last week where I got to reminisce with him for a bit) and that began a career that I never imagined at the time.Fast forward to 2010, and I'm still lauding the virtues of collaborative BI, if only the tools will catch up to my vision! Thus, I was anxious to see what Donald Farmer (blog | twitter) and Rita Sallam of Gartner had to say on the subject in their session "Collaborative Decision Making." As I suspected, the tools aren't quite there yet, but the vendors are moving in the right direction. One thing I liked about this session was a non-Microsoft perspective of the state of the industry with regard to collaborative BI. In addition, this session included a better demonstration of SharePoint collaborative BI capabilities than appeared in the BI keynote. Check out the video in the link to the session to see the demonstration. One of the use cases that was demonstrated was linking from information to a person, because, as Donald put it, "People don't trust data, they trust people."The Microsoft BI Stack in GeneralA question I hear all the time from students when I'm teaching is how to know what tools to use when there is overlap between products in the BI stack. I've never taken the time to codify my thoughts on the subject, but saw that my friend Dan Bulos provided good insight on this topic from a variety of perspectives in his session, "So Many BI Tools, So Little Time." I thought one of his best points was that ideally you should be able to design in your tool of choice, and then deploy to your tool of choice. Unfortunately, the ideal is yet to become real across the platform. The closest we come is with the RDL in Reporting Services which can be produced from two different tools (Report Builder or Business Intelligence Development Studio's Report Designer), manually, or by a third-party or custom application. I have touted the idea for years (and publicly said so about 5 years ago) that eventually more products would be RDL producers or consumers, but we aren't there yet. Maybe in another 5 years.Another interesting session that covered the BI stack against a backdrop of competitive products was delivered by Andrew Brust. Andrew did a marvelous job of consolidating a lot of information in a way that clearly communicated how various vendors' offerings compared to the Microsoft BI stack. He also made a particularly compelling argument about how the existence of an ecosystem around the Microsoft BI stack provided innovation and opportunities lacking for other vendors. Check out his presentation, "How Does the Microsoft BI Stack...Stack Up?"Expo HallI had planned to spend more time in the Expo Hall to see who was doing new things with the BI stack, but didn't manage to get very far. Each time I set out on an exploratory mission, I got caught up in some fascinating conversations with one or more of my peers. I find interacting with people that I meet at conferences just as important as attending sessions to learn something new. There were a couple of items that really caught me eye, however, that I'll share here.Pragmatic Works. Whether you develop SSIS packages, build SSAS cubes, or author SSRS reports (or all of the above), you really must take a look at BI Documenter. Brian Knight (twitter) walked me through the key features, and I must say I was impressed. Once you've seen what this product can do, you won't want to document your BI projects any other way. You can download a free single-user database edition, or choose from more feature-rich standard or professional editions.Microsoft Press ebooks. I also stopped by the O'Reilly Media booth to meet some folks that one of my acquisitions editors at Microsoft Press recommended. In case you haven't heard, Microsoft Press has partnered with O'Reilly Media for distribution and publishing. Apart from my interest in learning more about O'Reilly Media as an author, an advertisement in their booth caught me eye which I think is a really great move. When you buy Microsoft Press ebooks through the O'Reilly web site, you can receive it in any (or all) of the following formats where possible: PDF, epub, .mobi for Kindle and .apk for Android. You also have lifetime DRM-free access to the ebooks. As someone who is an avid collector of books, I fnd myself running out of room for storage. In addition, I travel a lot, and it's hard to lug my reference library with me. Today's e-reader options make the move to digital books a more viable way to grow my library. Having a variety of formats means I am not limited to a single device, and lifetime access means I don't have to worry about keeping track of where I've stored my files. Because the e-books are DRM-free, I can copy and paste when I'm compiling notes, and I can print pages when necessary. That's a winning combination in my mind!Overall, I was pleased with the BI conference. There were many more sessions that I couldn't attend, either because the room was full when I got there or there were multiple sessions running concurrently that I wanted to see. Fortunately, many of the sessions are accessible for viewing online at http://www.msteched.com/2010/NorthAmerica along with the TechEd sessions. You can spot the BI sessions by the yellow skyline on the title slide of the presentation as shown below. Share this post: email it! | bookmark it! | digg it! | reddit! | kick it! | live it!

    Read the article

  • Selling Federal Enterprise Architecture (EA)

    - by TedMcLaughlan
    Selling Federal Enterprise Architecture A taxonomy of subject areas, from which to develop a prioritized marketing and communications plan to evangelize EA activities within and among US Federal Government organizations and constituents. Any and all feedback is appreciated, particularly in developing and extending this discussion as a tool for use – more information and details are also available. "Selling" the discipline of Enterprise Architecture (EA) in the Federal Government (particularly in non-DoD agencies) is difficult, notwithstanding the general availability and use of the Federal Enterprise Architecture Framework (FEAF) for some time now, and the relatively mature use of the reference models in the OMB Capital Planning and Investment (CPIC) cycles. EA in the Federal Government also tends to be a very esoteric and hard to decipher conversation – early apologies to those who agree to continue reading this somewhat lengthy article. Alignment to the FEAF and OMB compliance mandates is long underway across the Federal Departments and Agencies (and visible via tools like PortfolioStat and ITDashboard.gov – but there is still a gap between the top-down compliance directives and enablement programs, and the bottom-up awareness and effective use of EA for either IT investment management or actual mission effectiveness. "EA isn't getting deep enough penetration into programs, components, sub-agencies, etc.", verified a panelist at the most recent EA Government Conference in DC. Newer guidance from OMB may be especially difficult to handle, where bottom-up input can't be accurately aligned, analyzed and reported via standardized EA discipline at the Agency level – for example in addressing the new (for FY13) Exhibit 53D "Agency IT Reductions and Reinvestments" and the information required for "Cloud Computing Alternatives Evaluation" (supporting the new Exhibit 53C, "Agency Cloud Computing Portfolio"). Therefore, EA must be "sold" directly to the communities that matter, from a coordinated, proactive messaging perspective that takes BOTH the Program-level value drivers AND the broader Agency mission and IT maturity context into consideration. Selling EA means persuading others to take additional time and possibly assign additional resources, for a mix of direct and indirect benefits – many of which aren't likely to be realized in the short-term. This means there's probably little current, allocated budget to work with; ergo the challenge of trying to sell an "unfunded mandate". Also, the concept of "Enterprise" in large Departments like Homeland Security tends to cross all kinds of organizational boundaries – as Richard Spires recently indicated by commenting that "...organizational boundaries still trump functional similarities. Most people understand what we're trying to do internally, and at a high level they get it. The problem, of course, is when you get down to them and their system and the fact that you're going to be touching them...there's always that fear factor," Spires said. It is quite clear to the Federal IT Investment community that for EA to meet its objective, understandable, relevant value must be measured and reported using a repeatable method – as described by GAO's recent report "Enterprise Architecture Value Needs To Be Measured and Reported". What's not clear is the method or guidance to sell this value. In fact, the current GAO "Framework for Assessing and Improving Enterprise Architecture Management (Version 2.0)", a.k.a. the "EAMMF", does not include words like "sell", "persuade", "market", etc., except in reference ("within Core Element 19: Organization business owner and CXO representatives are actively engaged in architecture development") to a brief section in the CIO Council's 2001 "Practical Guide to Federal Enterprise Architecture", entitled "3.3.1. Develop an EA Marketing Strategy and Communications Plan." Furthermore, Core Element 19 of the EAMMF is advised to be applied in "Stage 3: Developing Initial EA Versions". This kind of EA sales campaign truly should start much earlier in the maturity progress, i.e. in Stages 0 or 1. So, what are the understandable, relevant benefits (or value) to sell, that can find an agreeable, participatory audience, and can pave the way towards success of a longer-term, funded set of EA mechanisms that can be methodically measured and reported? Pragmatic benefits from a useful EA that can help overcome the fear of change? And how should they be sold? Following is a brief taxonomy (it's a taxonomy, to help organize SME support) of benefit-related subjects that might make the most sense, in creating the messages and organizing an initial "engagement plan" for evangelizing EA "from within". An EA "Sales Taxonomy" of sorts. We're not boiling the ocean here; the subjects that are included are ones that currently appear to be urgently relevant to the current Federal IT Investment landscape. Note that successful dialogue in these topics is directly usable as input or guidance for actually developing early-stage, "Fit-for-Purpose" (a DoDAF term) Enterprise Architecture artifacts, as prescribed by common methods found in most EA methodologies, including FEAF, TOGAF, DoDAF and our own Oracle Enterprise Architecture Framework (OEAF). The taxonomy below is organized by (1) Target Community, (2) Benefit or Value, and (3) EA Program Facet - as in: "Let's talk to (1: Community Member) about how and why (3: EA Facet) the EA program can help with (2: Benefit/Value)". Once the initial discussion targets and subjects are approved (that can be measured and reported), a "marketing and communications plan" can be created. A working example follows the Taxonomy. Enterprise Architecture Sales Taxonomy Draft, Summary Version 1. Community 1.1. Budgeted Programs or Portfolios Communities of Purpose (CoPR) 1.1.1. Program/System Owners (Senior Execs) Creating or Executing Acquisition Plans 1.1.2. Program/System Owners Facing Strategic Change 1.1.2.1. Mandated 1.1.2.2. Expected/Anticipated 1.1.3. Program Managers - Creating Employee Performance Plans 1.1.4. CO/COTRs – Creating Contractor Performance Plans, or evaluating Value Engineering Change Proposals (VECP) 1.2. Governance & Communications Communities of Practice (CoP) 1.2.1. Policy Owners 1.2.1.1. OCFO 1.2.1.1.1. Budget/Procurement Office 1.2.1.1.2. Strategic Planning 1.2.1.2. OCIO 1.2.1.2.1. IT Management 1.2.1.2.2. IT Operations 1.2.1.2.3. Information Assurance (Cyber Security) 1.2.1.2.4. IT Innovation 1.2.1.3. Information-Sharing/ Process Collaboration (i.e. policies and procedures regarding Partners, Agreements) 1.2.2. Governing IT Council/SME Peers (i.e. an "Architects Council") 1.2.2.1. Enterprise Architects (assumes others exist; also assumes EA participants aren't buried solely within the CIO shop) 1.2.2.2. Domain, Enclave, Segment Architects – i.e. the right affinity group for a "shared services" EA structure (per the EAMMF), which may be classified as Federated, Segmented, Service-Oriented, or Extended 1.2.2.3. External Oversight/Constraints 1.2.2.3.1. GAO/OIG & Legal 1.2.2.3.2. Industry Standards 1.2.2.3.3. Official public notification, response 1.2.3. Mission Constituents Participant & Analyst Community of Interest (CoI) 1.2.3.1. Mission Operators/Users 1.2.3.2. Public Constituents 1.2.3.3. Industry Advisory Groups, Stakeholders 1.2.3.4. Media 2. Benefit/Value (Note the actual benefits may not be discretely attributable to EA alone; EA is a very collaborative, cross-cutting discipline.) 2.1. Program Costs – EA enables sound decisions regarding... 2.1.1. Cost Avoidance – a TCO theme 2.1.2. Sequencing – alignment of capability delivery 2.1.3. Budget Instability – a Federal reality 2.2. Investment Capital – EA illuminates new investment resources via... 2.2.1. Value Engineering – contractor-driven cost savings on existing budgets, direct or collateral 2.2.2. Reuse – reuse of investments between programs can result in savings, chargeback models; avoiding duplication 2.2.3. License Refactoring – IT license & support models may not reflect actual or intended usage 2.3. Contextual Knowledge – EA enables informed decisions by revealing... 2.3.1. Common Operating Picture (COP) – i.e. cross-program impacts and synergy, relative to context 2.3.2. Expertise & Skill – who truly should be involved in architectural decisions, both business and IT 2.3.3. Influence – the impact of politics and relationships can be examined 2.3.4. Disruptive Technologies – new technologies may reduce costs or mitigate risk in unanticipated ways 2.3.5. What-If Scenarios – can become much more refined, current, verifiable; basis for Target Architectures 2.4. Mission Performance – EA enables beneficial decision results regarding... 2.4.1. IT Performance and Optimization – towards 100% effective, available resource utilization 2.4.2. IT Stability – towards 100%, real-time uptime 2.4.3. Agility – responding to rapid changes in mission 2.4.4. Outcomes –measures of mission success, KPIs – vs. only "Outputs" 2.4.5. Constraints – appropriate response to constraints 2.4.6. Personnel Performance – better line-of-sight through performance plans to mission outcome 2.5. Mission Risk Mitigation – EA mitigates decision risks in terms of... 2.5.1. Compliance – all the right boxes are checked 2.5.2. Dependencies –cross-agency, segment, government 2.5.3. Transparency – risks, impact and resource utilization are illuminated quickly, comprehensively 2.5.4. Threats and Vulnerabilities – current, realistic awareness and profiles 2.5.5. Consequences – realization of risk can be mapped as a series of consequences, from earlier decisions or new decisions required for current issues 2.5.5.1. Unanticipated – illuminating signals of future or non-symmetric risk; helping to "future-proof" 2.5.5.2. Anticipated – discovering the level of impact that matters 3. EA Program Facet (What parts of the EA can and should be communicated, using business or mission terms?) 3.1. Architecture Models – the visual tools to be created and used 3.1.1. Operating Architecture – the Business Operating Model/Architecture elements of the EA truly drive all other elements, plus expose communication channels 3.1.2. Use Of – how can the EA models be used, and how are they populated, from a reasonable, pragmatic yet compliant perspective? What are the core/minimal models required? What's the relationship of these models, with existing system models? 3.1.3. Scope – what level of granularity within the models, and what level of abstraction across the models, is likely to be most effective and useful? 3.2. Traceability – the maturity, status, completeness of the tools 3.2.1. Status – what in fact is the degree of maturity across the integrated EA model and other relevant governance models, and who may already be benefiting from it? 3.2.2. Visibility – how does the EA visibly and effectively prove IT investment performance goals are being reached, with positive mission outcome? 3.3. Governance – what's the interaction, participation method; how are the tools used? 3.3.1. Contributions – how is the EA program informed, accept submissions, collect data? Who are the experts? 3.3.2. Review – how is the EA validated, against what criteria?  Taxonomy Usage Example:   1. To speak with: a. ...a particular set of System Owners Facing Strategic Change, via mandate (like the "Cloud First" mandate); about... b. ...how the EA program's visible and easily accessible Infrastructure Reference Model (i.e. "IRM" or "TRM"), if updated more completely with current system data, can... c. ...help shed light on ways to mitigate risks and avoid future costs associated with NOT leveraging potentially-available shared services across the enterprise... 2. ....the following Marketing & Communications (Sales) Plan can be constructed: a. Create an easy-to-read "Consequence Model" that illustrates how adoption of a cloud capability (like elastic operational storage) can enable rapid and durable compliance with the mandate – using EA traceability. Traceability might be from the IRM to the ARM (that identifies reusable services invoking the elastic storage), and then to the PRM with performance measures (such as % utilization of purchased storage allocation) included in the OMB Exhibits; and b. Schedule a meeting with the Program Owners, timed during their Acquisition Strategy meetings in response to the mandate, to use the "Consequence Model" for advising them to organize a rapid and relevant RFI solicitation for this cloud capability (regarding alternatives for sourcing elastic operational storage); and c. Schedule a series of short "Discovery" meetings with the system architecture leads (as agreed by the Program Owners), to further populate/validate the "As-Is" models and frame the "To Be" models (via scenarios), to better inform the RFI, obtain the best feedback from the vendor community, and provide potential value for and avoid impact to all other programs and systems. --end example -- Note that communications with the intended audience should take a page out of the standard "Search Engine Optimization" (SEO) playbook, using keywords and phrases relating to "value" and "outcome" vs. "compliance" and "output". Searches in email boxes, internal and external search engines for phrases like "cost avoidance strategies", "mission performance metrics" and "innovation funding" should yield messages and content from the EA team. This targeted, informed, practical sales approach should result in additional buy-in and participation, additional EA information contribution and model validation, development of more SMEs and quick "proof points" (with real-life testing) to bolster the case for EA. The proof point here is a successful, timely procurement that satisfies not only the external mandate and external oversight review, but also meets internal EA compliance/conformance goals and therefore is more transparently useful across the community. In short, if sold effectively, the EA will perform and be recognized. EA won’t therefore be used only for compliance, but also (according to a validated, stated purpose) to directly influence decisions and outcomes. The opinions, views and analysis expressed in this document are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of Oracle.

    Read the article

  • Differences & Similarities Between Programming Paradigms

    - by DaveDev
    Hi Guys I've been working as a developer for the past 4 years, with the 4 years previous to that studying software development in college. In my 4 years in the industry I've done some work in VB6 (which was a joke), but most of it has been in C#/ASP.NET. During this time, I've moved from an "object-aware" procedural paradigm to an object-oriented paradigm. Lately I've been curious about other programming paradigms out there, so I thought I'd ask other developers their opinions on the similarities & differences between these paradigms, specifically to OOP? In OOP, I find that there's a strong focus on the relationships and logical interactions between concepts. What are the mind frames you have to be in for the other paradigms? Thanks Dave

    Read the article

  • What does a Software Developer actually do?

    - by chobo2
    Hi I am graduating from my Computer Science degree in a few weeks from now!! I started to look for my first job. For the last couple years I gotten really into web programming(Asp.net). My first choice would be to get a junior asp.net MVC developer but I don't any companies in my area use MVC yet or if they do they are not hiring. So my second choice would be a junior asp.net Webforms developer. My other choices after that would be forms applications, mobile applications using .Net and C#. As you can see I am looking for something with .Net. I spent the last couple years doing .Net projects for school, on my free time and love the Language and it would pain me right now to switch to something like php. So now I found a posting in my area for an Entry Software Developer. I like the fact that they are using .net and that it is entry job(I never worked in this industry and never had more then like a tutoring job so I want to for like intermediate jobs). Posting Are you looking for an exciting challenge within a dynamic, people-oriented culture where you can launch your technical career? Company Name Inc. is a technology consulting company, located in Canada, that designs, develops, and delivers real-time interactive applications accessed via the Internet as well as back-end tools to support these applications. Company Name provides a combination of out-of-the-box and customized solutions to an expanding list of partners and customers. POSITION SUMMARY As a member of our team, the successful candidate will be responsible for helping us increase the quality and stability of our software systems by working jointly and directly with both the Software Development teams and the QA Team. The primary mission of this role will be to substantially enhance our test automation suite. The incumbent will design and program automated tests (unit, integration, system, stress and load) in Visual Studio using C# and will develop sound processes that help us identify and resolve defects as early as possible. The successful incumbent will help us improve and enhance system functionality, reliability, performance and scalability. This role is specifically designed for an eager, bright, new graduate who is looking for a stepping stone into a software engineering role. We promote from within and invite new graduates to apply for this important position - which may lead to new opportunities. We also offer a generous professional development plan to help you on your way. You will be a key part of a team of experts that is responsible for improving the quality of our software by: • Designing, writing, and executing test plans and programmatic tests in Visual Studio using C# and NUnit for functional testing of our code, new features, regression, and performance test procedures. • Working with the engineers to design and build the stress and load testing framework which emulates tens and even hundreds of thousands of concurrent users via a distributed network interfacing with our Load Testing Lab. • Interfacing with both the Development Team and the QA Team to ensure risks are identified and managed. • Mentoring and leading the QA Team in programmatic test automation technologies and tools. MUST HAVE SKILLS / QUALIFICATIONS: • Diploma or higher Degree in Computer Science, or equivalent formal training. • Fundamental C# programming skills. • Knowledge of Internet technologies and Microsoft Windows platforms. • Knowledge of PC hardware. • Excellent communication skills (both oral and written). • Self-starter who takes initiative, requires minimal supervision, can handle multiple simultaneous tasks. • Detail-oriented, able to concentrate, and work quickly. • Proven diagnostic, analytical, and problem solving skills. NICE TO HAVE SKILLS: • Exposure to Visual Studio Team System or Visual Studio Test Edition. • Exposure in C# using NUnit. • Exposure to NUnit, HTTPUnit, and other automation tool suites. • Exposure to Performance/Stress/Load Testing. • Good understanding of relational databases (MS SQL Server). • Familiar with video and online multi-player games. As part of our team you will have the opportunity to work with a supportive team of experts, drive your own success, and ride the wave as we continually expand our team of experts. If you are interested in this opportunity, please send your resume to [email protected] with “Entry Level Software Developer” in the subject line. So that is the posting. To me it sounds like it is QA job. I don't have anything against QA jobs but alot of them seems to be your just clicking buttons and running scripts. Is this what a typical software developer does? Like I am so on the fence to apply for this job. On one side I am not sure how much programming I would be doing. Like I want to be at least half the time programming otherwise my skills will never improve since I will never be programming in teams and stuff. At the same time I have no experience in the industry so on the other side I am thinking just go for it and then maybe a year later try to get a full programming job(provided that I got the job). Yet if I am not programming in that job then that experience will not help me for the next job I find as I will be back a square one.

    Read the article

  • Organising asp.net website development process

    - by ZX12R
    Is there a standard practice to organize the process of developing a simple website. there is no use implementing MVC as there is no data base involved. It will be very useful in organizing the project and separating the aspx files and master page content(this can be very useful in implementing simple cms techniques) user controls scripts styles images is there any industry standard or best practice for this.? thanks in advance :) Update: yes the way i have listed is convenient. but it would be great if i could separate server codes and files like master,aspx.. and the actual page content. One more reason for not using MVC: I usually outsource the SEO process. Now an MVC application can be greek/latin for my SEO expert. :)

    Read the article

  • What's wrong with the analogy between software and building construction?

    - by kuosan
    Many people like to think of building software as constructing a building so we have terms like building blocks and architecture. However, lately I've been to a couple of talks and most people say this analogy is wrong especially around the idea of having a non-coding software architect in a project. In my experience, good software architects are those who also write code so they won't design things that only looks good on paper. I've worked with several Architecture Astronauts, who have either limited or outdated experience in programming. These architecture astronauts quite often missed out critical details in their design and cause more harm than good in a project. This makes me wonder what are the differences between constructing a software and a building? How come in the building industry they can have architects who probably never build a house in their life and purely handles design work but not in the software development field?

    Read the article

  • Windows Mobile Silverlight?

    - by eidylon
    Is it possible to develop Silverlight apps to run on WinMo devices? I see all around searching on the web - in articles from 2008 and 2009 - that they were adding Silverlight support in WinMo 6.1, for example: Internet Explorer Mobile The new version of Internet Explorer Mobile adds the ability to easily view full-screen Web pages and multimedia on the Web with a smartphone. Microsoft's press release states the new version takes advantage of "Internet Explorer 6 technologies" and supports industry standards such as H.264, Adobe Flash and Microsoft Silverlight. The update will be available to mobile phone partners in the third quarter of 2008, with the first Windows Mobile phones using the new version expected to be available by the end of 2008. But I have found an SL app supposedly geared for mobile devices (as much as I hate weatherbug), but when i try going there in PIE on my WinMo 6.1 device, it shows me the little "get silverlight" image button, but clicking it doesn't do anything. So, what is the story? Is SL/WinMo development possible, or ?

    Read the article

  • Studying MySQL, SQLite source code to learn about RDBMS implementation

    - by Yang
    I know implementing database is a huge topic, but I want to have a basic understanding of how database systems work (e.g. memory management, binary tree, transaction, sql parsing, multi-threading, partitions, etc) by investigating the source code of the database. Since there are a few already proven very robust open source databases like mysql, sqlite and so on. However, the code are very complicated and I have no clue where to start. Also I find that the old school database textbooks are only explaining the theory, not the implementation details. Can anyone suggest how I should get started and if there are any books that emphasis on the technology and techniques of building dbms used in modern database industry?

    Read the article

  • Pretty Printer for T-SQL?

    - by Paul
    I'm looking for a good T-SQL Pretty Printer so that all the code looks consistant between developers in our project. Preferably a free/open source one, but paid for isn't out of the realms of possibility as long as it's reasonably priced. Are there any particular industry leaders? I'm not that fussed about what particular standard it uses, but the more configurable the better. That way we can have little style wars among the developers and have a bit of fun to boot. ;-) I suppose I should add that Visual Studio and Management Studio integration would be considered favourably.

    Read the article

  • Knowledge base web app -- need a demo mode

    - by Smandoli
    I was contracted to build an on-line knowledge base that searches and cross-references many thousands of replacement parts for a niche industry. My client furnishes this app to his customers on a subscription basis. It uses MySQL and PHP and it works great. I want to deploy it in "demo mode" to sell my skills. I want the user to see the functions, but I have to guard the data for my client. My first idea was to obfuscate the results. That's at cross-purposes with showing how well it searches. I'm considering a limit on how many searches you can perform, but that's awkward too as someone could visit every day and get more answers than we would prefer. Other posts I've found are about letting people interact with an app, but without the challenge of protecting a big knowledge base. Can you suggest an approach? (Note, I put the tag obfuscation, but not sure it applies because java code obfuscation seems to be unrelated.)

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69  | Next Page >