Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [XP] Up-front vs evolutionary design -- was XP pros & cons

Expand Messages
  • Randy MacDonald
    Aren t the up-front tests all the infrastructure one needs? Later... ... BSc(Math) UNBF 83 Sapere Aude | APL: If you can say it, it s done.. Natural Born
    Message 1 of 107 , May 1, 2005
      Aren't the up-front tests all the infrastructure one needs?

      Later...
      -----------------------------------------------------------------------
      |\/| Randy A MacDonald | you can't pay for it,
      |\\| randymacdo@... | even if you want to.
      BSc(Math) UNBF'83 Sapere Aude | APL: If you can say it, it's done..
      Natural Born APL'er
      ------------------------------------------------------------{ gnat }-
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "Chris Wheeler" <christopher.wheeler@...>
      To: <extremeprogramming@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Sunday, May 01, 2005 2:46 PM
      Subject: Re: [XP] Up-front vs evolutionary design -- was XP pros & cons


      > >
      > > Could you say more about this particular situation?
      >
      >
      > I'll hop in here, if Friedrich doesn't mind. We work together, and so have
      > both experienced this. I won't get into details of the domain or
      specifics,
      > I don't have the energy or time now...
      >
      > The problem here is that one has to balance speculation with what is
      really
      > known. In this case, it wasn't speculation to say that we would need this
      > particular feature. It was 100% known it would be necessary. Yet,
      customers
      > wanted to defer building the whole thing in favour of getting other
      features
      > done.
      >
      > I understand this point of view. I also understand that sometimes you need
      > to pay a little more now to avoid paying a lot more later. There were
      > distinct technical problems that we outlined that would make incremental
      > building of the feature expensive, and we told the customer that if we
      built
      > the whole feature at the first point of entry, then we'd deliver it
      cheaper.
      > But, the customer wanted to move ahead, so we did, and today, the cost is
      > much higher.
      >
      > I am all for incremental delivery of business value. But the customer is
      not
      > always king. Sometimes there are technical reasons to do things now as
      > opposed to waiting for the exact business condition to set in. I have a
      lot
      > to say about this, as there have been a few occasions where I have
      wondered
      > if customers and programmers really understand the 'simplest thing that
      will
      > work'. I know that there are hidden, and sometimes not so obvious, and
      > sometimes hard to grasp requirements that are not in the same spirit as 'I
      > need a button that calculates the square root of a number' that drive the
      > construction of domain models.
      >
      > Certainly, sometimes I've said, "If only we had build more
      > > infrastructure up front!" However, with the benefit of hindsight,
      >
      >
      >
      > I don't completely agree that hindsight is the only sight that is 20/20...
      > Don't get me wrong, I beleive in evolutionary design and refactoring and
      TDD
      > and the simplest thing. I just beleive that we have yet to explore what
      the
      > simplest thing is in light of certain overarching requirements. I also
      tend
      > towards the belief that software architecture has a place in agility and
      > that we need to break our old moulds of what architecture is and create
      new
      > ones that work within the paradigm known as agile.
      >
      > Ron Jefferies, at the agile conference in Toronto gave a pretty decent
      > breakfast talk about not giving up everything that you used to do before
      > agility came along (like debugging, exploratory testing, usability, etc)
      and
      > just because you use the debugger, that doesn't mean that you aren't
      agile.
      > I like to think that just because you do architecture, that you can still
      be
      > agile. I just don't see a whole picture of what that means yet.
      >
      > Chris.
      > --
      > ---------------------
      > Chris Wheeler
      > Extreme Programmer & Coach
      > Visit my new site! http://www.agilelectric.com
      >
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
      >
      >
      > To Post a message, send it to: extremeprogramming@...
      >
      > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
      extremeprogramming-unsubscribe@...
      >
      > ad-free courtesy of objectmentor.com
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
    • Kent Beck
      Having recently finished a house, I would say that building a house is a design and construction activity. The Design/Build movement among large-scale
      Message 107 of 107 , May 7, 2005
        Having recently finished a house, I would say that building a house is a
        design and construction activity. The Design/Build movement among
        large-scale construction takes advantage of interleaving design and
        construction: www.dba.org.

        Kent Beck
        Three Rivers Institute

        > -----Original Message-----
        > From: extremeprogramming@yahoogroups.com
        > [mailto:extremeprogramming@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of John
        > D. Mitchell
        > Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2005 1:27 PM
        > To: extremeprogramming@yahoogroups.com
        > Subject: Re: [XP] Basement decisions
        >
        > >>>>> "Shane" == Shane Mingins <shanemingins@...> writes:
        > [...]
        >
        > > Is building a house a production activity or a development
        > activity? I
        > > would have thought it a production activity and hence the metaphor
        > > inappropriate.
        >
        > Common thinking is that house building is a construction activity.
        >
        > Alas, a lot of common thinking is that software development is also
        > (just/mostly) a construction activity, too.
        >
        > I find it intriguing that the folks who are actually pushing
        > the limits in
        > the building industry (big bridges, monster skyscrapers,
        > artsy fartsy jobs
        > (that's a technical term :-), etc.) are more and more
        > approaching their
        > constructions as living systems. That is, they are seeing
        > more and more of
        > the construct as being dynamic and they are building their systems
        > accordingly.
        >
        > Of course, the best craftspersons have always seen that.
        >
        > Take care,
        > John "Base-a-ball bean berry-berry gud 2 me" Mitchell
        >
        >
        >
        > To Post a message, send it to: extremeprogramming@...
        >
        > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
        > extremeprogramming-unsubscribe@...
        >
        > ad-free courtesy of objectmentor.com
        > Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.