3 ms·

Per the Wikipedia article, the term "waterfall" has always been pejorative. It was first described in 1970 as "this is a software development model which doesn'

• dragonwriter 13y ago
  > Per the Wikipedia article, the term "waterfall" has always been pejorative. That overstates what the Wikipedia article claims, which itself misrepresents the sources the article cites (e.g., the article it cites as the first use of "waterfall" does not use it in negative sense; it uses it descriptively -- while it does discuss the existence of a quality-of-requirements problem in software development (investigation of whether that perceived problem was real is the point of the paper), it doesn't place the blame for it on the waterfall model. Anyhow, my point upthread was that the sources cited in the article themselves are good if you want to understand the model of the time. (From those, it also looks like another good source would be MIL-STD 490 and/or MIL-STD 483, but I haven't had any luck finding them, the closest I've been able to find is MIL-STD 490A, which replaced 490 in 1985.)
• parasubvert 13y ago
  And yet, we have plenty of IT departments that proudly claim "we are a waterfall shop".