Search Results

Search found 126 results on 6 pages for 'waterfall'.

Page 4/6 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6  | Next Page >

  • How to penetrate the QA industry after layoffs, next steps...

    - by Erik
    Briefly, my background is in manual black box testing of websites and applications within the Agile/waterfall context. Over the past four years I was a member of two web development firms' small QA teams dedicated to testing the deployment of websites for national/international non profits, governmental organizations, and for profit business, to name a few: -Brookings Institution -Senate -Tyco Electronics -Blue Cross/Blue Shield -National Geographic -Discover Channel I have a very strong understanding of the: -SDLC -STLC of bugs and website deployment/development -Use Case & Test Case development In March of this year, my last firm downsized and lost my job as a QA tester. I have been networking and doing a very detailed job search, but have had a very difficult time getting my next job within the QA industry, even with my background as a manual black box QA tester in the website development context. My direct question to all of you: What are some ways I can be more competitive and get hired? Options that could get me competitive: Should I go back to school and learn some more 'hard' skills in website development and client side technologies, e.g.: -HTML -CSS -JavaScript Learn programming: -PHP -C# -Ruby -SQL -Python -Perl -?? Get Certified as a QA Tester, there are a countless numbers of programs to become a Certified Tester. Most, if not all jobs, being advertised now require Automated Testing experience, in: -QTP -Loadrunner -Selenium -ETC. Should I learn, Automated testing skills, via a paid course, or teach myself? --Learn scripting languages to understand the automated testing process better? Become a Certified "Project Management Professional" (PMP) to prove to hiring managers that I 'get' the project development life cycle? At the end of the day I need to be competitive and get hired as a QA tester and want to build upon my skills within the QA web development field. How should I do this, without reinventing the wheel? Any help in this regard would be fabulous. Thanks! .erik

    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

  • Should a programmer "think" for the client?

    - by P.Brian.Mackey
    I have gotten to the point where I hate requirements gathering. Customer's are too vague for their own good. In an agile environment, where we can show the client a piece of work to completion it's not too bad as we can make small regular corrections/updates to functionality. In a "waterfall" type in environment (requirements first, nearly complete product next) things can get ugly. This kind of environment has led me to constantly question requirements. E.G. Customer wants "automatically convert input to the number 1" (referring to a Qty in an order). But what they don't think about is that "input" could be a simple type-o. An "x" in a textbox could be a "woops" not I want 1 of those "toothpaste" products. But, there's so much in the air with requirements that I could stand and correct for hours on end smashing out what they want. This just isn't healthy. Working for a corporation, I could try to adjust the culture to fit the agile model that would help us (no small job, above my pay grade). Or, sweep ugly details under the rug and hope for the best. Maybe my customer is trying to get too close to the code? How does one handle the problem of "thinking for the client" without pissing them off with too many questions?

    Read the article

  • PASS Business Intelligence Virtual Chapter Upcoming Sessions (November 2013)

    - by Sergio Govoni
    Let me point out the upcoming live events, dedicated to Business Intelligence with SQL Server, that PASS Business Intelligence Virtual Chapter has scheduled for November 2013. The "Accidental Business Intelligence Project Manager"Date: Thursday 7th November - 8:00 PM GMT / 3:00 PM EST / Noon PSTSpeaker: Jen StirrupURL: https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/5018337449405969666 You've watched the Apprentice with Donald Trump and Lord Alan Sugar. You know that the Project Manager is usually the one gets firedYou've heard that Business Intelligence projects are prone to failureYou know that a quick Bing search for "why do Business Intelligence projects fail?" produces a search result of 25 million hits!Despite all this… you're now Business Intelligence Project Manager – now what do you do?In this session, Jen will provide a "sparks from the anvil" series of steps and working practices in Business Intelligence Project Management. What about waterfall vs agile? What is a Gantt chart anyway? Is Microsoft Project your friend or a problematic aspect of being a BI PM? Jen will give you some ideas and insights that will help you set your BI project right: assess priorities, avoid conflict, empower the BI team and generally deliver the Business Intelligence project successfully! Dimensional Modelling Design Patterns: Beyond BasicsDate: Tuesday 12th November - Noon AEDT / 1:00 AM GMT / Monday 11th November 5:00 PM PSTSpeaker: Jason Horner, Josh Fennessy and friendsURL: https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/852881628115426561 This session will provide a deeper dive into the art of dimensional modeling. We will look at the different types of fact tables and dimension tables, how and when to use them. We will also some approaches to creating rich hierarchies that make reporting a snap. This session promises to be very interactive and engaging, bring your toughest Dimensional Modeling quandaries. Data Vault Data Warehouse ArchitectureDate: Tuesday 19th November - 4:00 PM PST / 7 PM EST / Wednesday 20th November 11:00 PM AEDTSpeaker: Jeff Renz and Leslie WeedURL: https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/1571569707028142849 Data vault is a compelling architecture for an enterprise data warehouse using SQL Server 2012. A well designed data vault data warehouse facilitates fast, efficient and maintainable data integration across business systems. In this session Leslie and I will review the basics about enterprise data warehouse design, introduce you to the data vault architecture and discuss how you can leverage new features of SQL Server 2012 help make your data warehouse solution provide maximum value to your users. 

    Read the article

  • New Responsibilities

    - by Robert May
    With the start of the new year, I’m starting new responsibilities at Veracity. One responsibility that is staying constant is my love and evangelism of Agile.  In fact, I’ll be spending more time ensuring that all Veracity teams are performing agile, Scrum specifically, in a consistent manner so that all of our clients and consultants have a similar experience. Imagine, if you will, working for a consulting company on a project.  On that project, the project management style is Waterfall in iterations.  Now you move to another project and in that project, you’re doing real Scrum, but in both cases, you were told that what you were doing was Scrum.  Rather confusing.  I’ve found, however, that this happens on many teams and many projects.  Most companies simply aren’t disciplined enough to do Scrum.  Some think that being Agile means not being disciplined.  The opposite is true! So, my goals for Veracity are to make sure that all of our consultants have a consistent feel for Scrum and what it is and how it works and then to make sure that on the projects they’re assigned to, Scrum is appropriately applied for their situation.  This will help keep them happier, but also make switching to other projects easier and more consistent.  If we aren’t doing the project management on the project, we’ll help them know what good Agile practices should look like so that they can give good advice to the client, and so that if they move to another project, they have a consistent feel. I’m really looking forward to these new duties. Technorati Tags: Agile,Scrum

    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

  • How do you explain to an "agile" team that they still need to plan the software they write?

    - by user23157
    This week at work I got agiled yet again. Having gone through the standard agile, TDD, shared ownership, ad hoc development methodology of never planning anything beyond a few user stories on a piece of card, verbally chewing the cud over the technicallities of a 3rd party integration ad nauseam without ever doing any real thinking or due dilligence and architecturally coupling all production code to the first test that comes into anyone's head for the past few months we reach the end of a release cycle and lo and behold the main externally visible feature that we have been developing is too slow to use, buggy, becoming labyrinthinly complex and completely inflexible. During this process "spikes" were done but never documented and not a single architectural design was ever produced (there was no FS, so what the hell eh, if you don't know what you are developing, how can you plan or research it?) - the project passed from pair to pair, each of whom only ever focused on a single user story at a time and well the result was inevitable. To resolve this I went off the radar, went (the dreaded) waterfall, planned, coded and basically didn't swap off the pair and tried as much as I could to work alone - focusing on solid architecture and specifications rather than unit tests which will come later once everything is pinned down. The code is now much better and is actually totally usable, flexible and fast. Certain people seem to have really resented me doing this and have gone out of their way to sabotage my efforts (possibly unconsciously) because it goes against the holy process of agile. So how do you, as a developer, explain to the team that it is not "un-agile" to plan their work, and how do you fit planning into the agile process? (I'm not talking about the IPM; I'm talking about sitting down with a problem and sketching out an end-to-end design that says how a problem should be solved in sufficient detail that anyone who works on the problem knows what architecture and patterns they should be using and where the new code should integrate into existing code)

    Read the article

  • CUDA 4.1 Particle Update

    - by N0xus
    I'm using CUDA 4.1 to parse in the update of my Particle system that I've made with DirectX 10. So far, my update method for the particle systems is 1 line of code within a for loop that makes each particle fall down the y axis to simulate a waterfall: m_particleList[i].positionY = m_particleList[i].positionY - (m_particleList[i].velocity * frameTime * 0.001f); In my .cu class I've created a struct which I copied from my particle class and is as follows: struct ParticleType { float positionX, positionY, positionZ; float red, green, blue; float velocity; bool active; }; Then I have an UpdateParticle method in the .cu as well. This encompass the 3 main parameters my particles need to update themselves based off the initial line of code. : __global__ void UpdateParticle(float* position, float* velocity, float frameTime) { } This is my first CUDA program and I'm at a loss to what to do next. I've tried to simply put the particleList line in the UpdateParticle method, but then the particles don't fall down as they should. I believe it is because I am not calling something that I need to in the class where the particle fall code use to be. Could someone please tell me what it is I am missing to get it working as it should? If I am doing this completely wrong in general, the please inform me as well.

    Read the article

  • What some good books on software testing/quality?

    - by mjh2007
    I'm looking for a good book on software quality. It would be helpful if the book covered: The software development process (requirements, design, coding, testing, maintenance) Testing roles (who performs each step in the process) Testing methods (white box and black box) Testing levels (unit testing, integration testing, etc) Testing process (Agile, waterfall, spiral) Testing tools (simulators, fixtures, and reporting software) Testing of embedded systems The goal here is to find an easy to read book that summarizes the best practices for ensuring software quality in an embedded system. It seems most texts cover the testing of application software where it is simpler to generate automated test cases or run a debugger. A book that provided solutions for improving quality in a system where the tests must be performed manually and therefore minimized would be ideal.

    Read the article

  • Populate new row with VBA button click

    - by AME
    Hi, I am trying to create a list that adds a new row of data each time a button is clicked. I have the following code assigned to the button when clicked: PurchaseDate = InputBox("Enter Purchase Date:") Sheets("TrackRecord").Select i = 0 Row = i + 1 Range("A2").Select ActiveCell.FormulaR1C1 = Row Range("B2").Select ActiveCell.FormulaR1C1 = "=Dashboard!R26C4*(1/Dashboard!R26C12)" Range("C2").Select ActiveCell.FormulaR1C1 = "=Dashboard!R26C2" Range("D2").Select ActiveCell.FormulaR1C1 = PurchaseDate Range("E2").Select ActiveCell.FormulaR1C1 = "=Dashboard!R26C8 + R2C4" Range("F2").Select ActiveCell.FormulaR1C1 = "=Waterfall!R[8]C[5]" Range("F2").Select Selection.AutoFill Destination:=Range("F2:I2"), Type:=xlFillDefault Range("F2:I2").Select End Sub This code works fine, but I'd like it populate the next row below instead of overwriting the same row each time the button is clicked. I know that I have to iterate through the "Range("A2").select" section, e.g. "Range("A2").select" -- "Range("B2").select" .. But I don't know how to do this in VBA for Excel. That's why I am asking you folks ; ) . Thanks,

    Read the article

  • What software development process do you use and how do you implement it?

    - by clyfe
    Post only what you do use not what you would like to use, so we can see what is the most popular in real life. I am interested only in theese issues: Project Model (waterfall, agile...) How are requirements gathered (and stored)? Revision control - what software, what workflow Build automation, what software, where does it fit ? How is the testing done ? How is the documentation done ? How is the quality assurance done ? Please provide short objective answers, don't speak from the books. EXAMPLE: In my company we are a small team of 5 people and we develop webapps using ruby. agile PM cucumber requirements git SCM - Integration Manager Workflow integrity CI rspec automated tests the project lead creats the documentation skeleton then it is filled by the developers ensure quality by peer reviewing code and manual peer-testing

    Read the article

  • What are some good books on software testing/quality?

    - by mjh2007
    I'm looking for a good book on software quality. It would be helpful if the book covered: The software development process (requirements, design, coding, testing, maintenance) Testing roles (who performs each step in the process) Testing methods (white box and black box) Testing levels (unit testing, integration testing, etc) Testing process (Agile, waterfall, spiral) Testing tools (simulators, fixtures, and reporting software) Testing of embedded systems The goal here is to find an easy to read book that summarizes the best practices for ensuring software quality in an embedded system. It seems most texts cover the testing of application software where it is simpler to generate automated test cases or run a debugger. A book that provided solutions for improving quality in a system where the tests must be performed manually and therefore minimized would be ideal.

    Read the article

  • The Utilization of Software Engineering Development Principles

    - by Chance
    Being a CS student I've had to take a course in basic software engineering. I was a little curious to find such elaborate "software development processes", like the spiral model, the waterfall model, et cetera. Some of these methodologies seem a little antiquated to me and, after speaking with several employed developers, I can't seem to find anyone who actually adheres to these models. Does anyone here have experience working under the guidance of these models? Were they useful to you and your team during the development of your product? Or are these models just some way to communicate a sense of progression to interested parties outside of the development team?

    Read the article

  • Agile Approach for WCM

    - by cameron.f.logan
    Can anyone provide me with advice, opinions, or experience with using an agile methodology to delivery an enterprise-scale Web Content Management system (e.g., Interwoven TeamSite, Tridion)? My current opinion is that to implement a CM system there is a certain--relatively high--amount of upfront work that needs to happen to make sure the system is going to be scalable and efficient for future projects for the multi-year lifespan an WCM is expected to have. This suggests a hybrid approach at best, if not a more waterfall-like approach. I'm really interested to learn what approaches others have taken. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Team activity/game for illustrating design in a SCRUM environment

    - by njreed.myopenid.com
    I'm looking for a team building / training activity for some of my scrum teams. I want something that really illustrates the flexibility that the team has when implementing stories to define the scope and complexity of the feature themselves. Most of the teams have long-term waterfall experience and are used to having a well-defined specification. I'm looking for something that illustrates the need for the team to vary the scope of what they are building themselves, dependent on the time and resources available. I couldn't find anything at tastycupcakes.com and Google wasn't much help. Maybe someone has prepared something themselves they would care to share?

    Read the article

  • Agile isn’t always Agile

    - by BuckWoody
    I want to make a disclaimer before I dive into this topic – At Microsoft we use all kinds of development methodologies, and I’ve worked in lots of other shops using lots of methodologies. This is one of those “religious” topics like which programming language or database is best, and is bound to generate some heat. But this isn’t pointed towards one particular event or company. But I really don’t like Agile. In particular, I really don’t like Scrum. Let me explain. Agile is a methodology for developing software that emphasizes adapting to change more so than the traditional “waterfall” method of developing software. Within Agile is a process called a “scrum” meeting. The pitch goes that in this quick, stand-up meeting the people involved in the development project (which should include the DBA, but very often doesn’t) go around the room stating what they are working on, when that will be finished and what is keeping them from getting finished (“blockers”, these are called). Sounds all very non-threatening – we’re just “enabling” the developers to work more efficiently. And that’s what we all want, isn’t it? Except it doesn’t work. In my experience (and yours might be VERY different) this just turns into a micro-management environment, where devs have to defend their daily work. Of all the work environments I hate the most, micro-management environments are THE worst. I don’t like workign in them, and I don’t like creating them. The other issue I have with Scrum is that it makes your whole team task-focused. Everyone wants to make sure that they are not the “long pole” in the meeting (meaning that they aren’t the one that gets all the attention) so they only focus on safe, quick tasks. And although you have all of the boxes checked, the project does not go well at all – even when it does finish. Before you comment (and please do comment) I fully realize that Agile <> Scrum. But in my experience, it sometimes turns into that. Share this post: email it! | bookmark it! | digg it! | reddit! | kick it! | live it!

    Read the article

  • PERT shows relationships between defined tasks in a project without taking into consideration a time line

    The program evaluation and review technique (PERT) shows relationships between defined tasks in a project without taking into consideration a time line. This chart is an excellent way to identify dependencies of tasks based on other tasks. This chart allows project managers to identify the critical path of a project to minimize any time delays to the project. According to Craig Borysowich in his article “Pros & Cons of the PERT/CPM Method stated the following advantages and disadvantages: “PERT/CPM has the following advantages: A PERT/CPM chart explicitly defines and makes visible dependencies (precedence relationships) between the WBS elements, PERT/CPM facilitates identification of the critical path and makes this visible, PERT/CPM facilitates identification of early start, late start, and slack for each activity, PERT/CPM provides for potentially reduced project duration due to better understanding of dependencies leading to improved overlapping of activities and tasks where feasible.  PERT/CPM has the following disadvantages: There can be potentially hundreds or thousands of activities and individual dependency relationships, The network charts tend to be large and unwieldy requiring several pages to print and requiring special size paper, The lack of a timeframe on most PERT/CPM charts makes it harder to show status although colors can help (e.g., specific color for completed nodes), When the PERT/CPM charts become unwieldy, they are no longer used to manage the project.” (Borysowich, 2008) Traditionally PERT charts are used in the initial planning of a project like in a project that is utilizing the waterfall approach. Once the chart was created then project managers could further analyze this data to determine the earliest start time for each stage in the project. This is important because this information can be used to help forecast resource needs during a project and where in the project. However, the agile environment can approach this differently because of their constant need to be in contact with the client and the other stakeholders.  The PERT chart can also be used during project iteration to determine what is to be worked on next, such as a prioritized To-Do list a wife would give her husband at the start of a weekend. In my personal opinion, the COTS-centric environment would not really change how a company uses a PERT chart in their day to day work. The only thing I can is that there would be less tasks to include in the chart because the functionally milestones are already completed when the components are purchased. References: http://www.netmba.com/operations/project/pert/ http://web2.concordia.ca/Quality/tools/20pertchart.pdf http://it.toolbox.com/blogs/enterprise-solutions/pros-cons-of-the-pertcpm-method-22221

    Read the article

  • The 2010 Life Insurance Conference - Washington, DC

    - by [email protected]
    How ironic to be in Washington, DC on April 15 - TAX DAY! Fortunately, I avoided IRS offices and attended the much more enjoyable 2010 Life Insurance Conference, presented by LIMRA, LOMA SOA and ACLI. This year's conference offered a variety of tracks focused on the Life Industry including Distribution/Marketing Marketing, Administration, Actuarial/Product Development, Regulatory, Reinsurance and Strategic Management. President and CEO of the ACLI, Frank Keating, opened the event by moderating a session titled "Executive Viewpoint on new Opportunities." Guest speakers included Ted Mathas, President and CEO of NY Life, and John Walters, President and CEO of Hartford Life. Both speakers were insightful as they shared the challenges and opportunities each company faces and the key role life insurance companies play in our society and the global economy. There were several key themes that were reiterated in multiple sessions throughout the conference - the economy is on the rebound, optimism is growing, consumer spending is up and an uptick in employment is likely to follow. The threat of a double dip recession has seemed to passed. Good news for our industry, and welcomed by all in attendance. Of special interest to me, given my background, was some research shared by both The Nolan Group and Novarica in separate sessions. Both firms indicate that policy administration upgrades/replacement projects remain a top priority in 2010. Carriers continue to invest in modern technology. Modern ultra-configurable systems enable carriers to switch from a waterfall to an agile project methodology, which often entails a "culture change" within an organization. Other themes heard throughout the two-day event: Virtually all sessions focused on People, Process and Technology! Product innovation, agility and speed to market are as important as ever. Social Networks and Twitter are becoming more popular ways of communicating with both field and dispersed staff. Several sessions focused on the application, new business and underwriting process. Companies continue looking for ways to increase market agility, accelerate speed to market, address cost issues and improve service levels across the process. They recognize the need to ease the way to do business with both producers and consumers. Author and economic futurist Jeff Thredgold presented an entertaining, informative and humorous general session on Wednesday afternoon that focused on the US and global economies, financial markets and retirement outlook. Thredgold did not disappoint anyone with his message! The Thursday morning general session was keynoted by Therese Vaughan (CEO - NAIC) and Thomas Crawford (President of C2 Group). Both speakers gave a poignant view of the recent financial crisis and discussed "Putting the Pieces Back Together." Therese spoke of the recent financial turmoil and likely changes to regulations to the financial services sector. Tom's topics focused on economic recovery and the political environment in Washington, and how that impacts our industry. Next year's event will be April 11-13, 2011 in Las Vegas. Roger A.Soppe, CLU, LUTCF, is the Senior Director of Insurance Strategy, Oracle Insurance.

    Read the article

  • Roll your own free .NET technical conference

    - by Brian Schroer
    If you can’t get to a conference, let the conference come to you! There are a ton of free recorded conference presentations online… Microsoft TechEd Let’s start with the proverbial 800 pound gorilla. Recent TechEds have recorded the majority of presentations and made them available online the next day. Check out presentations from last month’s TechEd North America 2012 or last week’s TechEd Europe 2012. If you start at http://channel9.msdn.com/Events/TechEd, you can also drill down to presentations from prior years or from other regional TechEds (Australia, New Zealand, etc.) The top presentations from my “View Queue”: Damian Edwards: Microsoft ASP.NET and the Realtime Web (SignalR) Jennifer Smith: Design for Non-Designers Scott Hunter: ASP.NET Roadmap: One ASP.NET – Web Forms, MVC, Web API, and more Daniel Roth: Building HTTP Services with ASP.NET Web API Benjamin Day: Scrum Under a Waterfall NDC The Norwegian Developer Conference site has the most interesting presentations, in my opinion. You can find the videos from the June 2012 conference at that link. The 2011 and 2010 pages have a lot of presentations that are still relevant also. My View Queue Top 5: Shay Friedman: Roslyn... hmmmm... what? Hadi Hariri: Just ‘cause it’s JavaScript, doesn’t give you a license to write rubbish Paul Betts: Introduction to Rx Greg Young: How to get productive in a project in 24 hours Michael Feathers: Deep Design Lessons ØREDEV Travelling on from Norway to Sweden... I don’t know why, but the Scandinavians seem to have this conference thing figured out. ØREDEV happens each November, and you can find videos here and here. My View Queue Top 5: Marc Gravell: Web Performance Triage Robby Ingebretsen: Fonts, Form and Function: A Primer on Digital Typography Jon Skeet: Async 101 Chris Patterson: Hacking Developer Productivity Gary Short: .NET Collections Deep Dive aspConf - The Virtual ASP.NET Conference Formerly known as “mvcConf”, this one’s a little different. It’s a conference that takes place completely on the web. The next one’s happening July 17-18, and it’s not too late to register (It’s free!). Check out the recordings from February 2011 and July 2010. It’s two years old and talks about ASP.NET MVC2, but most of it is still applicable, and Jimmy Bogard’s Put Your Controllers On a Diet presentation is the most useful technical talk I have ever seen. CodeStock Videos from the 2011 edition of this Tennessee conference are available. Presentations from last month’s 2012 conference should be available soon here. I’m looking forward to watching Matt Honeycutt’s Build Your Own Application Framework with ASP.NET MVC 3. UserGroup.tv User Group.tv was founded in January of 2011 by Shawn Weisfeld, with the mission of providing User Group content online for free. You can search by date, group, speaker and category tags. My View Queue Top 5: Sergey Rathon & Ian Henehan: UI Test Automation with Selenium Rob Vettor: The Repository Pattern Latish Seghal: The .NET Ninja’s Toolbelt Amir Rajan: Get Things Done With Dynamic ASP.NET MVC Jeffrey Richter: .NET Nuggets – Houston TechFest Keynote

    Read the article

  • TechEd 2012: Day 3 &ndash; Morning TFS

    - by Tim Murphy
    My morning sessions for day three were dominated by Team Foundation Server.  This has been a hot topic for our clients lately, so this topic really stuck a chord. The speaker for the first session was from Boeing.  It was nice to hear how how a company mixes both agile and waterfall project management.   The approaches that he presented were very pragmatic.  For their needs reporting is the crucial part of their decision to use TFS.  This was interesting since this is probably the last aspect that most shops would think about. The challenge of getting users to adopt TFS was brought up by the audience.  As with the other discussion point he took a very level headed stance.  The approach he was prescribing was to eat the elephant a bite at a time instead of all at once.  If you try to convert you entire shop at once the culture shock will most likely kill the effort. Another key point he reminded us of is that you need to make sure that standards and compliance are taken into account when you setup TFS.  If you don’t implement a tool and processes around it that comply with the standards bodies that govern your business you are in for a world of hurt. Ultimately the reason they chose TFS was because it was the first tool that incorporated all the ALM features that they needed. Reduced licensing cost because of all the different tools they would need to buy to complete the same tasks.  They got to this point by doing an industry evaluation.  Although TFS came out on top he said that it still has a big gap is in the Java area.  Of course in this market there are vendors helping to close that gap. The second session was on how continuous feedback in agile is a new focus in VS2012.  The problems they intended to address included cycle time and average time to repair, root cause analysis. The speakers fired features at us as if they were firing a machine gun.  I will just say that I am looking forward to digging into the product after seeing this presentation.  Beyond that I will simply list some of the key features that caught my attention. Feature – Ability to link documents into tasks as artifacts Web access portal PowerPoint storyboards Exploratory testing Request feedback (allows users to record notes, screen shots and video/audio) See you after the second half. del.icio.us Tags: TechEd,TechEd 2012,TFS,Team Foundation Server

    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

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6  | Next Page >