3 ms·
Well, at least _some_ aspects of a 50k feet Waterfall are not avoidable in any construction project, as you can‘t redo parts of the foundation when you‘re build
by endymi0n 8y ago
Well, at least _some_ aspects of a 50k feet Waterfall are not avoidable in any construction project, as you can‘t redo parts of the foundation when you‘re building the 50th floor.
Something that works quite in the same way (not as strongly, but still significantly so) in software by the way is re-modelling of the underlying entity schema.
Which by the way is my favorite beef with process-driven agile methods and why I‘m leading my projects with an initial phase of data model and UX sessions until it‘s exactly clear _what_ needs to be built and _how_. Only then does it make sense to build any working code IMHO.
Scrum and friends come with a complete disregard for distinguishing the stuff that‘s easy to change later on vs. the parts that are not.
- AstralStorm 8y agoYou generally can change those things even in a building but it gets exponentially more expensive, and at some point such deep changes are better done by a full careful rewrite - building a second building.
- Scarblac 8y agoI think Agile's point was that even if you do all that work figuring out what to build first, it will STILL change later. There needs to be a mindset that everything is temporary, even the underlying entity schema, because it is. That doesn't work with huge software systems, which is why they mostly stop being developed and can only be somewhat maintained after some time.
- marcosdumay 8y agoThings always change. This is unavoidable. You can either work to minimize the amount of change you'll have and identify the places where it's more likely, so you can add flexibility there, or you can be caught by surprise every time and pray that the next change won't suddenly throw years of work away. Both are perfectly sane attitudes on different contexts.