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

RUP as an opportunity - Was Moving Towards Confusion

Expand Messages
  • alshalloway
    I used to avoid companies that were trying to implement RUP. Typically the mandate came from above. I ve had developers come to my patterns courses saying
    Message 1 of 31 , May 30, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      I used to avoid companies that were trying to implement RUP.
      Typically the mandate came from above. I've had developers come to
      my patterns courses saying something like: "come and help us, i'm
      now spending 98% of my time doing documentation." I have certainly
      seen RUP be a disaster. However, I'm not really interested in
      laying blame, i'm trying to see what is workable.

      When I've talked to Rational consultants and some senior people at
      Rational, I realize that although RUP is often (maybe even usually)
      mis-implemented, it's typically because it is not being implemented
      the way the Rational folks are suggesting. They stress that an
      iterative (and agile) approach is necessary (read _any_ RUP book).

      A few months ago this gave me the idea of working with companies
      doing RUP and just trying to implement the best practices that were
      applicable to the companies. I didn't worry about whether it was
      RUP, SCRUM, XP or whatever. RUP has a lot of useful things to
      offer. I think about RUP as the Unified Process with Rational's
      tool set. If I don't want to use a tool, I don't have to. However,
      I definitely need a source control tool and if management wants to
      buy Clearcase (a good but expensive tool, in my opinion) then I can
      do RUP where my tool is clearcase.

      I start out implementing best practices like source control and
      continous integration. I educate the people to understand while
      short iterations are essential. I point out how RUP recommends this
      so I get buy in from people who "know" they need to use RUP but
      don't really understand. I point out how document generation is not
      a good measurement of how far the project has gone. I discuss
      Cockburn's philosophy of sufficient but efficient (no more than you
      need).

      Typically use-cases are desired in a RUP type corporation. However,
      I don't necessarily have to use Rose to write them. I can follow
      Cockburn's Writing Effective Use Cases approach (great book :)

      If pairing is appropriate, I can even pair (I personally think
      pairing is just about always useful, but I can't convince everyone).
      I can go on and on, but I hope I've made my point.

      The bottom line is people want software developed efficiently and
      effectively. By avoiding labeling what I am doing I can be more
      effective. Actually, I think I am labeling what I am doing - I
      label it according to the result I am trying to produce. By
      following a process of implementing best practices, I can move a
      team forward.

      This is one of the funny things about RUP. You can follow RUP
      pretty much however you like because it is not very prescriptive.
      XP, on the other hand, is completely prescriptive (however,
      implementing the prescriptions is not easy).

      Anyway, instead of railing against methodologies, I suggest we worry
      about the problems we are trying to solve and not worry about the
      misleading labels.

      Alan Shalloway, Sr. Consultant, CEO
      office: 425-313-3065. mobile: 425-531-0810
      Net Objectives' vision is effective software development without
      suffering. Our mission is to assist software development teams in
      accomplishing this through a combination of training and mentoring.
    • Robert Watkins
      ... White s book is excellent on general principles, and very good (though somewhat dated now) on ClearCase. The first half is fairly agnostic as to the
      Message 31 of 31 , Jun 4, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        On Sat, 2002-06-01 at 01:34, Booch, Grady wrote:
        > [egb> ] The RUP's best practices regarding configuration management are
        > codified in a thing we called UCM (unified configuration management) and are
        > described in Brian White's book, found on Amazon at
        > http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0201604787/qid=1022859184/sr=2-2/ref=
        > sr_2_2/103-1882647-3967065

        White's book is excellent on general principles, and very good (though
        somewhat dated now) on ClearCase. The first half is fairly agnostic as
        to the technology (though ClearCase is used for the examples), and would
        apply to any SSC-derived configuration management system (which is
        pretty much all of them).

        I got my copy free with my ClearCase admin certification training, but I
        wouldn't recommended that as the way to get the book. :)

        Robert.

        --
        "Software is too expensive to build cheaply"
        Robert Watkins email: robertdw@...
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.