4 ms·

Another "architect" here (actually just a slightly better paid, higher skilled developer and as you say full of war stories). I think you pretty much hit the n

Another "architect" here (actually just a slightly better paid, higher skilled developer and as you say full of war stories). I think you pretty much hit the nail on the head there :) The amount of other architects I have to deal with from big well known organisations over the last few years is scary. My team are the only guys I have met who get outside of Word, Project and Excel and actually put pen to paper so to speak. Avoid ALL process frameworks entirely though, including MSF which is a rotten turd. The only process I've seen that works is: backlog (arc/business) -> design/review (arch) -> build (arch/dev) -> test (arch/test) -> deploy (arch/operations). Note the total involvement of architecture teams.

Spearchucker 14y ago
I quite like MSF. The milestones and deliverables it advocates are a good pick-list and sanity check. That said, I think anyone new to process could learn a lot from it, because it's based on Rapid Development (ref. Steve McConnel's book with the same title). Anyone new to process should similarly understand and (ideally) have used all the other usual suspects, from RUP to Waterfall. The premise being that you can't really argue against something if you've not experienced it for yourself.
- gouranga 14y ago
  I've worked under MSF, RUP and good old waterfall. They're all dead ends if you ask me, even delivering massive enterprise software. To be honest these processes were fine with earlier tooling such as Visual Basic which was rigid, inflexible, hard to test etc but (whilst wincing using the term Agile), there are much more agile languages now which allow test frameworks to be built effectively. We've settled finally on a hybrid Kanban approach. It's simple, everyone understands it, there are no power trips, it just works. backlog -> arch -> dev -> test -> deployed There is no agile ceremony or SCRUM-wankery (pigs, chicken shit) - we binned all that and just did work.

Spearchucker 14y ago

I quite like MSF. The milestones and deliverables it advocates are a good pick-list and sanity check. That said, I think anyone new to process could learn a lot from it, because it's based on Rapid Development (ref. Steve McConnel's book with the same title). Anyone new to process should similarly understand and (ideally) have used all the other usual suspects, from RUP to Waterfall. The premise being that you can't really argue against something if you've not experienced it for yourself.

gouranga 14y ago
I've worked under MSF, RUP and good old waterfall. They're all dead ends if you ask me, even delivering massive enterprise software. To be honest these processes were fine with earlier tooling such as Visual Basic which was rigid, inflexible, hard to test etc but (whilst wincing using the term Agile), there are much more agile languages now which allow test frameworks to be built effectively. We've settled finally on a hybrid Kanban approach. It's simple, everyone understands it, there are no power trips, it just works. backlog -> arch -> dev -> test -> deployed There is no agile ceremony or SCRUM-wankery (pigs, chicken shit) - we binned all that and just did work.