Search Results

Search found 1204 results on 49 pages for 'agile'.

Page 4/49 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Cone of Uncertainty in classic and agile projects

    - by DigiMortal
    David Starr from Scrum.org made interesting session in TechEd Europe 2012 - Implementing Scrum Using Team Foundation Server 2012. One of interesting things for me was how Cone of Uncertainty looks like in agile projects (or how agile methodologies distort the cone we know from waterfall projects). This posting illustrates two cones – one for waterfall and one for agile world. Cone of Uncertainty Cone of Uncertainty was introduced to software development community by Steve McConnell and it visualizes how accurate are our estimates over project timeline. Here is the Cone of Uncertainty when we deal with waterfall and Big Design Up-Front (BDUF). Cone of Uncertainty. Taken from MSDN Library page Estimating. The closer we are to project end the more accurate are our estimates. When project ends we know exactly how much every task took time. As we can see then cone is wide when we usually have to give our estimates – it happens somewhere between Initial Project Concept and Requirements Complete. Don’t ask me why Initial Project Concept is the stage where some companies give their best estimates – they just do it every time and doesn’t learn a thing later. This cone is inevitable for software development and agile methodologies that try to make software world better are also able to change the cone. Cone of Uncertainty in agile projects Agile methodologies usually try to avoid BDUF, waterfalls and other things that make all our mistakes highly expensive. Of course, we are not the only ones who make mistakes – don’t also forget our dear customers. Agile methodologies take development as creational work and focus on making it better. One main trick is to focus on small and short iterations. What it means? We are estimating functionalities that are easier for us to understand and implement. Therefore our estimates are more accurate. As we move from few big iterations to many small iterations we also distort and slice Cone of Uncertainty. This is how cone looks when agile methodologies are used. Cone of Uncertainty in agile projects. We have more cones to live with but they are way smaller. I don’t have any numbers to put here because I found any but still this “chart” should give you the point: more smaller iterations cause more but way smaller cones of uncertainty. We can handle these small uncertainties because steps we take to complete small tasks are more predictable and doesn’t grow very often above our heads. One more note. Consider that both of charts given in this posting describe exactly the same phase of same project – just uncertainties are different.

    Read the article

  • Introduction to Agile Development

    - by Grant Fritchey
    Even though my current job is a little weird, I still consider myself to be a DBA. I didn’t start that way in IT. I came through support and into development. I loved development. There was a constant struggle to attempt to improve your code, your understanding, and, most importantly, the process of development itself. Development can be slow and tedious. Left alone, developers can simply disappear to build a project and not come back for two years, at which time they deliver it. But, maybe that software isn’t what you wanted, or it’s no longer needed, or who knows what. So developers are constantly attempting to improve their processes in order to deliver more relavent software quicker (something DBAs could learn about). I really admire it. One of the many processes that has come out of that constant striving is known as Agile. As the name implies, Agile development attempts to come up with a quick, fast turning, business aware, well, for want of a word, agile, process that is more responsive to the needs of the business. There are tons and tons of books and blogs and videos on the subject that can get you going. But, Agile isn’t easy (note, Easy is not part of the name). Agile processes can be hard. I’ve worked on multiple agile teams, some successful, some not. The two principal differences between the teams were their discipline and their knowledge of the process. Discipline, that comes from within. But knowledge, ah, well there I can help. Red Gate is bringing a series of free instructional events to the United States in a few weeks time focused primarily on SQL Server (click here right now to register while there’s still space). We’re also offering some .NET instruction too. That’s a full day, free, with top experts in the business. But, the next day, there’s a full day session introducing Agile. You can go to this and learn how to do Agile. Develop that knowledge that will enable you to successfully use the Agile process. Go to this web site to check it out. No, this event is not free, but not everything can be. And it’s not just for developers. DBAs, you need to learn this stuff too. Management could also benefit from understanding these processes (because you guys can help to enforce discipline). It’s really for everyone involved in the development process.

    Read the article

  • "Agile Principles, Patterns, and Practices in C#": Is this just a .NET-translation of the popular Uncle Bob book?

    - by Louis Rhys
    I found this book sold on Amazon Agile Principles, Patterns, and Practices in C#, written by Robert C Martin and Micah Martin. Is it merely a .NET port of the older, more popular Agile Software Development, Principles, Patterns, and Practices? Or is it just a new book trying to take advantage of the other book's popularity? If I am a .NET developer who hasn't read either book, which one would you recommend?

    Read the article

  • Why has extreme programming (XP) gone out of date in favor of Agile, Kanban etc?

    - by Nick Rosencrantz
    I like XP (extreme programming) especially the part where there are 2 programmers at the same screen since often a problem's solution gets closer if only you explain what you're doing and pair programming forces you to explain what your doing. Last 10 years or so, the XP style of working seems to have gone out of date in favor of the working methodologies Agile and/or Kanban. Why? Since XP to me seems a veru good way to work and is a lot about the programming where Agile and Kanban are more about processes.

    Read the article

  • AutoVue for Agile 20.2.2 Now Available!!

    - by Warren Baird
    We are happy to announce that AutoVue for Agile 20.2.2 is now available via the Oracle Software Delivery Cloud.   AutoVue for Agile 20.2.2 is a minor release within the 20.2 product family that is specifically targeted for users of Agile PLM 9. AutoVue 20.2.2 brings a number of improvements, including support for SolidWorks 2013, AutoCAD and Inventor 2014, SolidEdge ST5, and Cadence Allegro 16.6.   It also includes support for Adobe Illustrator CS4 and up.   Another improvement involves bringing our support for Oracle Linux and Java Virtual Machine versions in-line with Agile's support. Please see our previous post (https://blogs.oracle.com/enterprisevisualization/entry/autovue_20_2_2_is) for more details on the specifics introduced in AutoVue 20.2.2. Agile PLM 9.3.3 has also been released, which as part of its many improvements introduces support for associating AutoVue annotations with change request objects in Agile, and a preliminary solution using Augmented Business Visualization to allow the creation of change objects from within AutoVue.   Please see the Agile Transfer of Information sessions in the KM note 1589164.1 for more details. We will provide additional posts over the next couple of weeks providing more details on these improvements.  Until then, if you have any questions, let us know in the comments! 

    Read the article

  • Agile development; on-line free tools!

    - by BT.
    We have been looking to implement Agile methodology within our geographically distributed development team, so i need suggestions on any free on-line application that you have used and find useful. Right now we are using paper cards and wall to manage this :), but we want to shift to an on-line version preferably free. I have used TargetProcess at my previous job! My Core requirements are: Business Analyst can add user stories We can assign, prioritize different user stories to developers. QA team can add test cases around different user stories. Project Manager can track the time of all the resources and can pull reports for upper management

    Read the article

  • How can we make agile enjoyable for developers that like to personally, independently own large chunks from start to finish

    - by Kris
    We’re roughly midway through our transition from waterfall to agile using scrum; we’ve changed from large teams in technology/discipline silos to smaller cross-functional teams. As expected, the change to agile doesn’t suit everyone. There are a handful of developers that are having a difficult time adjusting to agile. I really want to keep them engaged and challenged, and ultimately enjoying coming to work each day. These are smart, happy, motivated people that I respect on both a personal and a professional level. The basic issue is this: Some developers are primarily motivated by the joy of taking a piece of difficult work, thinking through a design, thinking through potential issues, then solving the problem piece by piece, with only minimal interaction with others, over an extended period of time. They generally complete work to a high level of quality and in a timely way; their work is maintainable and fits with the overall architecture. Transitioning to a cross-functional team that values interaction and shared responsibility for work, and delivery of working functionality within shorter intervals, the teams evolve such that the entire team knocks that difficult problem over. Many people find this to be a positive change; someone that loves to take a problem and own it independently from start to finish loses the opportunity for work like that. This is not an issue with people being open to change. Certainly we’ve seen a few people that don’t like change, but in the cases I’m concerned about, the individuals are good performers, genuinely open to change, they make an effort, they see how the rest of the team is changing and they want to fit in. It’s not a case of someone being difficult or obstructionist, or wanting to hoard the juiciest work. They just don’t find joy in work like they used to. I’m sure we can’t be the only place that hasn’t bumped up on this. How have others approached this? If you’re a developer that is motivated by personally owning a big chunk of work from end to end, and you’ve adjusted to a different way of working, what did it for you?

    Read the article

  • How can we make agile enjoyable for developers that like to personally, independently own large chunks from start to finish

    - by Kris
    We’re roughly midway through our transition from waterfall to agile using scrum; we’ve changed from large teams in technology/discipline silos to smaller cross-functional teams. As expected, the change to agile doesn’t suit everyone. There are a handful of developers that are having a difficult time adjusting to agile. I really want to keep them engaged and challenged, and ultimately enjoying coming to work each day. These are smart, happy, motivated people that I respect on both a personal and a professional level. The basic issue is this: Some developers are primarily motivated by the joy of taking a piece of difficult work, thinking through a design, thinking through potential issues, then solving the problem piece by piece, with only minimal interaction with others, over an extended period of time. They generally complete work to a high level of quality and in a timely way; their work is maintainable and fits with the overall architecture. Transitioning to a cross-functional team that values interaction and shared responsibility for work, and delivery of working functionality within shorter intervals, the teams evolve such that the entire team knocks that difficult problem over. Many people find this to be a positive change; someone that loves to take a problem and own it independently from start to finish loses the opportunity for work like that. This is not an issue with people being open to change. Certainly we’ve seen a few people that don’t like change, but in the cases I’m concerned about, the individuals are good performers, genuinely open to change, they make an effort, they see how the rest of the team is changing and they want to fit in. It’s not a case of someone being difficult or obstructionist, or wanting to hoard the juiciest work. They just don’t find joy in work like they used to. I’m sure we can’t be the only place that hasn’t bumped up on this. How have others approached this? If you’re a developer that is motivated by personally owning a big chunk of work from end to end, and you’ve adjusted to a different way of working, what did it for you?

    Read the article

  • What do you do if you reach a design dead-end in evolutionary methods like Agile or XP?

    - by Dipan Mehta
    As I was reading Martin Fowler's famous blog post Is Design Dead?, one of the striking impressions I got is that given the fact that in Agile Methodology and Extreme Programming, the design as well as programming is evolutionary, there are always points where things need to get refactored. It may be possible that when a programmer's level is good, and they understand design implications and don't make critical mistakes, the code continues to evolve. However, in a normal context, what is the ground reality in this context? In a normal day given some significant development goes into product, and when critical change occurs in requirement isn't it a constraint that how much ever we wish, fundamental design aspects cannot be modified? (without throwing away major part of the code). Is it not quite likely that one reaches dead-end on any further possible improvement on design and requirements? I am not advocating any non-Agile practice here, but I want to know from people who practice agile or iterative or evolutionary development methods, as for their real experiences. Have you ever reached such dead-ends? How have you managed to avoid it or escaped it? Or are there measures to ensure that design remains clean and flexible as it evolves?

    Read the article

  • In agile environment, how is bug tracking and iteration tracking consolidated.

    - by DXM
    This topic stemmed from my other question about management-imposed waterfall-like schedule. From the responses in the other thread, I gathered this much about what is generally advised: Each story should be completed with no bugs. Story is not closed until all bugs have been addressed. No news there and I think we can all agree with this. If at a later date QA (or worse yet a customer) finds a bug, the report goes into a bug tracking database and also becomes a story which should be prioritized just like all other work. Does this sum up general handling of bugs in agile environment? If yes, the part I'm curious about is how do teams handle tracking in two different systems? (unless most teams don't have different systems). I've read a lot of advice (including Joel's blog) on software development in general and specifically on importance of a good bug tracking tool. At the same time when you read books on agile methodology, none of them seem to cover this topic because in "pure" agile, you finish iteration with no bugs. Feels like there's a hole there somewhere. So how do real teams operate? To track iterations you'd use (whiteboard, Rally...), to track bugs you'd use something from another set of products (if you are lucky enough, you might even get stuck with HP Quality Center). Should there be 2 separate systems? If they are separate, do teams spend time creating import/sync functionality between them? What have you done in your company? Is bug tracking software even used? Or do you just go straight to creating a story?

    Read the article

  • Using Definition of Done to Drive Agile Maturity

    - by Dylan Smith
    I’ve been an Agile Coach at a lot of different clients over the years, and I want to share an approach I use to help them adopt and mature over time. It’s important to realize that “Agile” is not a black/white yes/no thing. Teams can be varying degrees of agile. I think of this as their agile maturity level. When I coach teams I want them to start out being a little agile, and get more agile as they mature. The approach I teach them is to use the definition of done as a technique to continuously improve their agile maturity over time. We’re probably all familiar with the concept of “Done Done” that represents what *actually* being done a feature means. Not just when a developer says he’s done right after he writes that last line of code that makes the feature kind-of work. Done Done means the coding is done, it’s been tested, installers and deployment packages have been created, user manuals have been updated, architecture docs have been updated, etc. To enable teams to internalize the concept of “Done Done”, they usually get together and come up with their Definition of Done (DoD) that defines all the activities that need to be completed before a feature is considered Done Done. The Done Done technique typically is applied only to features (aka User Stories). What I do is extend this to apply to several concepts such as User Stories, Sprints, Releases (and sometimes Check-Ins). During project kick-off I’ll usually sit down with the team and go through an exercise of creating DoD’s for each of these concepts (Stories/Sprints/Releases). We’ll usually start by just brainstorming a bunch of activities that could end up in these various DoD’s. Here’s some examples: Code Reviews StyleCop FxCop User Manuals Updated Architecture Docs Updated Tested by QA Tested by UAT Installers Created Support Knowledge Base Updated Deployment Instructions (for Ops) written Automated Unit Tests Run Automated Integration Tests Run Then we start by arranging these activities into the place they occur today (e.g. Do you do UAT testing only once per release? every sprint? every feature?). If the team was previously Waterfall most of these activities probably end up in the Release DoD. An extremely mature agile team would probably have most of these activities in the DoD for the User Stories (because an extremely mature agile team will probably do continuous deployment and release every story). So what we need to do as a team, is work to move these activities from their current home (Release DoD) down into the Sprint DoD and eventually into the User Story DoD (and maybe into the lower-level Check-In DoD if we decide to use that). We don’t have to move them all down to User Story immediately, but as a team we figure out what we think we’re capable of moving down to the Sprint cycle, and Story cycle immediately, and that becomes our starting DoD’s. Over time the team makes an effort to continue moving activities down from Release->Sprint->Story as they become more agile and more mature. I try to encourage them to envision a world in which they deploy to production as each User Story is completed. They would need to be updating User Manuals, creating installers, doing UAT testing (typical Release cycle activities) on every single User Story. They may never actually reach that point, but they should envision that, and strive to keep driving the activities down closer to the User Story cycle s they mature. This is a great technique to give a team an easy-to-follow roadmap to mature their agile practices over time. Sure there’s other aspects to maturity outside of this, but it’s a great technique, that’s easy to visualize, to drive agility into the team. Just keep moving those activities (aka “gates”) down the board from Release->Sprint->Story. I’ll try to give an example of what a recent client of mine had for their DoD’s (this is from memory, so probably not 100% accurate): Release Create/Update deployment Instructions For Ops Instructional Videos Updated Run manual regression test suite UAT Testing In this case that meant deploying to an environment shared across the enterprise that mirrored production and asking other business groups to test their own apps to ensure we didn’t break anything outside our system Sprint Deploy to UAT Environment But not necessarily actually request UAT testing occur User Guides updated Sprint Features Video Created In this case we decided to create a video each sprint showing off the progress (video version of Sprint Demo) User Story Manual Test scripts developed and run Tested by BA Deployed in shared QA environment Using automated deployment process Peer Code Review Code Check-In Compiled (warning-free) Passes StyleCop Passes FxCop Create installer packages Run Automated Tests Run Automated Integration Tests PS – One of my clients had a great question when we went through this activity. They said that if a Sprint is by definition done when the end-date rolls around (time-boxed), isn’t a DoD on a sprint meaningless – it’s done on the end-date regardless of whether those other activities are complete or not? My answer is that while that statement is true – the sprint is done regardless when the end date rolls around – if the DoD activities haven’t been completed I would consider the Sprint a failure (similar to not completing what was committed/planned – failure may be too strong a word but you get the idea). In the Retrospective that will become an agenda item to discuss and understand why we weren’t able to complete the activities we agreed would need to be completed each Sprint.

    Read the article

  • Please, tell us how you made Agile work for you?

    - by Paul
    I've been seeing many questions related to Agile. There seems to be confusion between the people who are doing Agile successfully, and those of us who don't understand it. So I'm wondering if some of the successful teams would be willing to give the result of us some examples of how you succeeded. Some of the things I know I wonder What steps did you use? (ie. Talk to users, mock up, tests, code, testing, (whatever)) Tools that helped you? Did you generate any artifacts, other than a working implementation? How did you prevent spaghetti architecture / code? How do you pass along to new team members, or is the team stable for the project How did you determine exit criteria, or was it open ended. (Scope of project?) Did you do this as contracting? How did you develop a contract up-front? Did the business do any up front work? Or did they come to the table with "We want to implement a "bleh bleh blah"? What types of tests did you use? Unit, Integration, UAT? Or did the process make some/all of those unnecessary? Bonus: Do you have an situations / links to "How To" Agile articles, books, etc? Wiki, describes what but not how (to the uninitiated) At least to me, not a duplicate

    Read the article

  • Agile Development - Developer Qualification required, and Disadvantages of

    - by Everyone
    We have been using Agile on a project for 3 years now. Albeit I was new to scrum, it came to me easily enough. However we found it quite difficult to break any freshers into the scrumming process. One reason may have been that estimation for the future requires domain and technology depth that freshers lack. What, if any is the necessary qualification for a developer be part of an Agile team? What, in your experience, are drawbacks to Agile?

    Read the article

  • Agile Development - Developer Qualification required, and Disadvantages of

    - by Everyone
    We have been using Agile on a project for 3 years now. Albeit I was new to scrum, it came to me easily enough. However we found it quite difficult to break any freshers into the scrumming process. One reason may have been that estimation for the future requires domain and technology depth that freshers lack. What, if any is the necessary qualification for a developer be part of an Agile team? What, in your experience, are drawbacks to Agile?

    Read the article

  • Building a life-critical System using Agile

    - by Ben Breen
    Looking at the general trend of comments in my question about Building an Aircraft using Agile, the biggest problem other than cost appears to be safety. Do people feel that it is not possible to build a safe system (or prove it is safe) using agile? Doesn’t all the iterative testing mitigate this? Is it likely that a piece of software developed using agile will never be as reliable as counterparts such as waterfall?

    Read the article

  • How to deal with clients and iterations in Agile team?

    - by Ondrej Slinták
    This thread is a follow up to my previous one. It's in fact 2 questions, so I hope no one minds, as they are dependent on each other. We are starting a new project at work and we consider it as a great opportunity to try Agile techniques in action. We had a brainstorming about ideas we read in several books and articles, and came up with concept that would suit us the best: 2 weeks iteration, followed by call with clients who would choose what stuff they want to have in next iteration. I just have few more questions, which we couldn't figure out ourselves. What to do in the first iteration? What to, generally, do in the first few iterations if we start from the scratch? Just give it a month of development to code core of the application or start with simple wire-frames with limited pre-coded functionality? What usually clients want to see? Shiny stuff that doesn't work or ugly stuff that does work? How to communicate with clients? Our initial thought it to set the process to something like this: Is it a good idea to have a Focal Point on client side or is it better to communicate straight with all the clients to prevent miscommunication? Any thoughts are welcome! Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • L'excès de tests unitaires nuirait au développement agile, ils seraient favorisés par rapport aux tests d'intégration

    L'excès de tests unitaires nuirait au développement agile Ils seraient favorisés par rapport aux tests d'intégrationBien souvent, le développement agile mise sur le développement piloté par les tests (TDD). Aujourd'hui, Mark Balbes, un des membres les plus éminents de Asynchrony Solutions et expert en développement logiciel et en gestion de projet agile, nous livre sa vision des faits en ce qui concerne le TDD.L'expert estime qu'actuellement, le développement agile use excessivement du TDD, les...

    Read the article

  • Is there a viable alternative to the agile development methodology? [closed]

    - by Eric Wilson
    The two predominant software-development methodologies are waterfall and agile. When discussing these two, there is often much focus on the particular practices that distinguish them (pair programming, TDD, etc. vs. functional spec, big up-front design, etc.) But the real differences are far deeper, in that these practices come from a philosophy. Waterfall says: Change is costly, so it should be minimized. Agile says: Change is inevitable, so make change cheap. My question is, regardless of what you think of TDD or functional specs, is the waterfall development methodology really viable? Does anyone really think that minimizing change in software is a viable option for those that desire to deliver valuable software? Or is the question really about what sort of practices work best in our situations to manage the inevitable change?

    Read the article

  • How should I pitch moving to an agile/iterative development cycle with mandated 3-week deployments?

    - by Wayne M
    I'm part of a small team of four, and I'm the unofficial team lead (I'm lead in all but title, basically). We've largely been a "cowboy" environment, with no architecture or structure and everyone doing their own thing. Previously, our production deployments would be every few months without being on a set schedule, as things were added/removed to the task list of each developer. Recently, our CIO (semi-technical but not really a programmer) decided we will do deployments every three weeks; because of this I instantly thought that adopting an iterative development process (not necessarily full-blown Agile/XP, which would be a huge thing to convince everyone else to do) would go a long way towards helping manage expectations properly so there isn't this far-fetched idea that any new feature will be done in three weeks. IMO the biggest hurdle is that we don't have ANY kind of development approach in place right now (among other things like no CI or automated tests whatsoever). We don't even use Waterfall, we use "Tell Developer X to do a task, expect him to do everything and get it done". Are there any pointers that would help me start to ease us towards an iterative approach and A) Get the other developers on board with it and B) Get management to understand how iterative works? So far my idea involves trying to set up a CI server and get our build process automated (it takes about 10-20 minutes right now to simply build the application to put it on our development server), since pushing tests and/or TDD will be met with a LOT of resistance at this point, and constantly force us to break larger projects into smaller chunks that could be done iteratively in a three-week cycle; my only concern is that, unless I'm misunderstanding, an agile/iterative process may or may not release the software (depending on the project scope you might have "working" software after three weeks, but there isn't enough of it that works to let users make use of it), while I think the expectation here from management is that there will always be something "ready to go" in three weeks, and that disconnect could cause problems. On that note, is there any literature or references that explains the agile/iterative approach from a business standpoint? Everything I've seen only focuses on the developers, how to do it, but nothing seems to describe it from the perspective of actually getting the buy-in from the businesspeople.

    Read the article

  • How agile methodologies can be applied in a typical " services " company?

    - by AlfaTeK
    My company is a custom software services company for external clientes, which means our typical project is one in which the contract already states the full budget of the project. Our typical project starts by defining requirements (improving the proposal high-level requirements), then we code the project, test it and ship it. We have an acceptance phase were the client tests the software and in that phase we can usually implement small changes asked by the client, or we charge extra for change requests. In some projects we have intermediate releases so the clients can check the progress of the project and give feedback on it. In summary: something like waterfall... I've followed the "agile" movement for a bit now and I always see it being a good match for a "product" company, or a company building software for an internal client. But are there good stories / advantages on using agile methods in my kind of company/projects? What are your experiences, what do you think about this?

    Read the article

  • Which features of user story management should an agile team look for?

    - by Sonja Dimitrijevic
    In my research study, I need to identify the key features of user story management tools that can be used to support agile development. So far, I identified the following general groups of features: User role modeling and personas support, User stories and epics management, Acceptance testing support, High-level release planning, Low-level iteration planning, and Progress tracking. Each group contains some specific features, e.g., support for story points, writing of acceptance tests, etc. Which features of user story management should an agile team look for especially when switching from tangible tools (index cards, pin boards and big visible charts) to a software tool? Are some features more important than the others? Many thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • How can you plan long range resources and budgets when using Agile methodology?

    - by Mystere Man
    Agile does not encourage a lot of up-front design. This is good from a requirements management and software development standpoint, and allows the project to adapt to changing business needs. However, how does one do any long range planning of resources if you don't really know what you're going to build when you start? Oh sure, you have a conceptual model of what you're going to build, but you don't have any measurable detail from which to gague how many resources you will need to complete the project, or how much it will cost. Does anyone have any suggestions on how to go about long range planning in an agile environment?

    Read the article

  • Can Agile/Scrum be used by 1 or 2 developers?

    - by Dillie-O
    Everything I've been reading and researching up to this point describes how Agile/Scrum works great with teams of about 4 to 6 members, maybe even more. In my current shop, we have about 8 developers or so, but given the nature of the volume of projects and the number of departments we support, we never have more than 1 or 2 folks assigned to a given project. Can I still use Agile/Scrum with a team of 1 or 2 developers? I'm working on making the pitch to my manager to start working with this methodology, but I need to be able to explain how to scale things back for a small developer crew, or convince them to make sure we get more members on a given project.

    Read the article

  • What is Agile Modeling and why do I need it?

    What is Agile Modeling and why do I need it? Agile Modeling is an add-on to existing agile methodologies like Extreme programming (XP) and Rational Unified Process (RUP). Agile Modeling enables developers to develop a customized software development process that actually meets their current development needs and is flexible enough to adjust in the future. According to Scott Ambler, Agile Modeling consists of five core values that enable this methodology to be effective and light weight Agile Modeling Core Values: Communication Simplicity Feedback Courage Humility Communication is a key component to any successful project. Open communication between stakeholder and the development team is essential when developing new applications or maintaining legacy systems. Agile models promote communication amongst software development teams and stakeholders. Furthermore, Agile Models provide a common understanding of an application for members of a software development team allowing them to have a universal common point of reference. The use of simplicity in Agile Models enables the exploration of new ideas and concepts through the use of basic diagrams instead of investing the time in writing tens or hundreds of lines of code. Feedback in regards to application development is essential. Feedback allows a development team to confirm that the development path is on track. Agile Models allow for quick feedback from shareholders because minimal to no technical expertise is required to understand basic models. Courage is important because you need to make important decisions and be able to change direction by either discarding or refactoring your work when some of your decisions prove inadequate, according to Scott Ambler. As a member of a development team, we must admit that we do not know everything even though some of us think we do. This is where humility comes in to play. Everyone is a knowledge expert in their own specific domain. If you need help with your finances then you would consult an accountant. If you have a problem or are in need of help with a topic why would someone not consult with a subject expert? An effective approach is to assume that everyone involved with your project has equal value and therefore should be treated with respect. Agile Model Characteristics: Purposeful Understandable Sufficiently Accurate Sufficiently Consistent Sufficiently Detailed Provide Positive Value Simple as Possible Just Fulfill Basic Requirements According to Scott Ambler, Agile models are the most effective possible because the time that is invested in the model is just enough effort to complete the job. Furthermore, if a model isn’t good enough yet then additional effort can be invested to get more value out of the model. However if a model is good enough, for the current needs, or surpass the current needs, then any additional work done on the model would be a waste. It is important to remember that good enough is in the eye of the beholder, so this can be tough. In order for Agile Models to work effectively Active Stakeholder need to participation in the modeling process. Finally it is also very important to model with others, this allows for additionally input ensuring that all the shareholders needs are reflected in the models. How can Agile Models be incorporated in to our projects? Agile Models can be incorporated in to our project during the requirement gathering and design phases. As requirements are gathered the models should be updated to incorporate the new project details as they are defined and updated. Additionally, the Agile Models created during the requirement phase can be the bases for the models created during the design phase.  It is important to only add to the model when the changes fit within the agile model characteristics and they do not over complicate the design.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >