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

Re: [XP] Agility and technical documentation (was: Big Visible Charts)

Expand Messages
  • Jeff Grigg
    ... This certification is a business requirement. The documentation /necessary/ to achive this certification is a legitimate business requirement. An XP team
    Message 1 of 49 , Mar 1, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      >>-----Original Message-----
      >>From: Ron Jeffries [mailto:ronjeffries@a...]
      >>[...]
      >>Please give an example where agility is more costly than
      >>whatever the opposite of agility is.

      --- "Glen B. Alleman" <galleman@n...> wrote:
      > Here's one,
      >
      > I'm building (at I did) a TMR fault tolerant process control
      > computer. The hardware and the software need to be certified
      > by TUV and SINTEF before they can be used in offshore and
      > process safety applications. The code and schematics need
      > to be published in all their glory along with all the fault
      > injection and partial diagnostic coverage theory and
      > results. This all needs to be packaged up and sent to the
      > certification agencies.
      >
      > In the XP world (assuming the ultimate agile process) I'd
      > have to send the development team to Trondheim Norway and
      > Bergen Germany in place of the docs. They would then
      > explain in detail how all the hardware and software worked
      > to the certification agencies, then fly home after the 3
      > month verification.

      This certification is a business requirement. The
      documentation /necessary/ to achive this certification is a
      legitimate business requirement. An XP team can and must produce
      the required documentation, as requested by User Stories, at the
      time that the Customer considers them to provide the greatest
      business value.

      I would speculate that an XP team would ideally produce most of such
      required documentation in the last half of the project, rather than
      in the first half. If you do it too early, then the cost of
      maintaining the documentation and redoing analysis after refactoring
      will be higher.


      On the other hand, with respect to technical documentation requests,
      I've been in plenty of situations where technical managers push for
      *lots* of technical documentation up-front out of *fear* and based
      on *speculation* that some unknown auditors in the future might "be
      impressed" by such documentation and refrain from hurting us. But
      I've found that successful delivery of quality software to the
      business users can often serve as a good defense in such situations.


      > The trade off will be "docs" compliant with the certif-
      > ication submission, or people living in Norway and
      > Germany for 3 months, two translators, food, phone
      > calls home, wives, girl and boy friends sent to Europe
      > for conjugal visits etc.

      I've been wanting to visit Germany, and I hear that Norway is
      pretty. ;->
    • Jeff Grigg
      ... This certification is a business requirement. The documentation /necessary/ to achive this certification is a legitimate business requirement. An XP team
      Message 49 of 49 , Mar 1, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        >>-----Original Message-----
        >>From: Ron Jeffries [mailto:ronjeffries@a...]
        >>[...]
        >>Please give an example where agility is more costly than
        >>whatever the opposite of agility is.

        --- "Glen B. Alleman" <galleman@n...> wrote:
        > Here's one,
        >
        > I'm building (at I did) a TMR fault tolerant process control
        > computer. The hardware and the software need to be certified
        > by TUV and SINTEF before they can be used in offshore and
        > process safety applications. The code and schematics need
        > to be published in all their glory along with all the fault
        > injection and partial diagnostic coverage theory and
        > results. This all needs to be packaged up and sent to the
        > certification agencies.
        >
        > In the XP world (assuming the ultimate agile process) I'd
        > have to send the development team to Trondheim Norway and
        > Bergen Germany in place of the docs. They would then
        > explain in detail how all the hardware and software worked
        > to the certification agencies, then fly home after the 3
        > month verification.

        This certification is a business requirement. The
        documentation /necessary/ to achive this certification is a
        legitimate business requirement. An XP team can and must produce
        the required documentation, as requested by User Stories, at the
        time that the Customer considers them to provide the greatest
        business value.

        I would speculate that an XP team would ideally produce most of such
        required documentation in the last half of the project, rather than
        in the first half. If you do it too early, then the cost of
        maintaining the documentation and redoing analysis after refactoring
        will be higher.


        On the other hand, with respect to technical documentation requests,
        I've been in plenty of situations where technical managers push for
        *lots* of technical documentation up-front out of *fear* and based
        on *speculation* that some unknown auditors in the future might "be
        impressed" by such documentation and refrain from hurting us. But
        I've found that successful delivery of quality software to the
        business users can often serve as a good defense in such situations.


        > The trade off will be "docs" compliant with the certif-
        > ication submission, or people living in Norway and
        > Germany for 3 months, two translators, food, phone
        > calls home, wives, girl and boy friends sent to Europe
        > for conjugal visits etc.

        I've been wanting to visit Germany, and I hear that Norway is
        pretty. ;->
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.