New Key Principles   

Dear RUP forum readers: IBM Rational has just updated its well-known six best practices for software development! Check out the article that explains the changes at http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/rational/library/oct05/kroll/index.html and return here to post your questions and comments. I'll answer as many questions as I can, or you'll receive answers from other experts on the RUP team. We look forward to hearing from you. --Per Kroll, Manager of Methods, IBM Rational

Per, thanks to you and Walker for your informative article. In the Adapt the Process section, I found your point concerning of "big-picture" planning and estimating very interesting. The problem I have had in the past is getting management to be accepting of this approach. Their issue being mostly the need to request specific budget amounts. Is their an approach you can recommend to get management more on board with this thinking?

Thanks,

Robbie Mac Iver
Partner
softwareDecisions
www.swdecisions.com

Robbie Mac Iver
Partner
softwareDecisions
www.swdecisions.com

They are in version 7.0 of RUP.

Regards,

Remco Bruns
remcob@infosupport.com

________________________________

From: owner-rup@lists.us.ibm.com on behalf of chakri
Sent: Fri 6-1-2006 7:33
To: rup@lists.us.ibm.com
Subject: rup Re: New Key Principles

Hi,

IBM Rational's six best practices for software development are updated ,but what about the RUP Product?

Is IBM Rational coming up with a new version of RUP to incorporate these changes?

Thanks
Chakradhar
<============================================================
To unsubscribe, send email to
majordomo@lists.us.ibm.com and put these words in the
message body: unsubscribe rup
============================================================>

*********************************************************************************
Info Support - http://www.infosupport.com

Alle informatie in dit e-mailbericht is onder voorbehoud. Info Support is
op geen enkele wijze aansprakelijk voor vergissingen of onjuistheden
in dit bericht en staat niet in voor de juiste en volledige overbrenging
van de inhoud hiervan. Op al de werkzaamheden door Info Support
uitgevoerd en op al de aan ons gegeven opdrachten zijn onze
Algemene Voorwaarden van toepassing, gedeponeerd bij de griffie
van de rechtbank te Utrecht op 12 januari 2005 onder nummer
261/2004 en bij de Kamer van Koophandel te Utrecht onder nr.
30135370. Een exemplaar zenden wij u op uw verzoek per omgaande
kosteloos toe.

De informatie in dit e-mailbericht is uitsluitend bestemd voor de
geadresseerde. Gebruik van deze informatie door anderen is
verboden. Openbaarmaking, vermenigvuldiging, verspreiding en/of
verstrekking van deze informatie aan derden is niet toegestaan.

Dit e-mailbericht kan vertrouwelijke informatie bevatten. Indien u dit
bericht dus per ongeluk ontvangt, stelt Info Support het op prijs als u
de zender door een antwoord op deze e-mail hiervan op de hoogte
brengt en deze e-mail vervolgens vernietigt.
*********************************************************************************

http://winmail.dat

RUP v7.0 is part of/delivered with RMC.
Remco Bruns

________________________________

From: owner-rup@lists.us.ibm.com on behalf of RobExley
Sent: Fri 6-1-2006 11:45
To: rup@lists.us.ibm.com
Subject: rup Re: RE:Re: New Key Principles

Is RUP v7.0 synonymous with RMC?

--
Rob Exley.
<============================================================
To unsubscribe, send email to
majordomo@lists.us.ibm.com and put these words in the
message body: unsubscribe rup
============================================================>

*********************************************************************************
Info Support - http://www.infosupport.com

Alle informatie in dit e-mailbericht is onder voorbehoud. Info Support is
op geen enkele wijze aansprakelijk voor vergissingen of onjuistheden
in dit bericht en staat niet in voor de juiste en volledige overbrenging
van de inhoud hiervan. Op al de werkzaamheden door Info Support
uitgevoerd en op al de aan ons gegeven opdrachten zijn onze
Algemene Voorwaarden van toepassing, gedeponeerd bij de griffie
van de rechtbank te Utrecht op 12 januari 2005 onder nummer
261/2004 en bij de Kamer van Koophandel te Utrecht onder nr.
30135370. Een exemplaar zenden wij u op uw verzoek per omgaande
kosteloos toe.

De informatie in dit e-mailbericht is uitsluitend bestemd voor de
geadresseerde. Gebruik van deze informatie door anderen is
verboden. Openbaarmaking, vermenigvuldiging, verspreiding en/of
verstrekking van deze informatie aan derden is niet toegestaan.

Dit e-mailbericht kan vertrouwelijke informatie bevatten. Indien u dit
bericht dus per ongeluk ontvangt, stelt Info Support het op prijs als u
de zender door een antwoord op deze e-mail hiervan op de hoogte
brengt en deze e-mail vervolgens vernietigt.
*********************************************************************************

http://winmail.dat

Robbie,

you point out a common and excellent problem. The only solution I know of is to educate your mgmt team.

The fundamentally difficult hurdle managers needs to come across is that when you do not know enough to produce an accurate estimate, it will not help to do a more fine-granular plan. Rather, you need to do a list of what are the unknowns and risks preventing you from doing a more detailed estimate, and then rapidly do the analysis, design, implementation, testing, or other risk mitigation turing unknowns into knowns. This sounds as something that should not be very difficult to understand, but it really is a big mountain to climb for many people...

So, where can your manager get a better understanding on these topics? Some suggestions:

• Joe Morasco, Iterative Development, http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/rational/library/2841.html
• Philippe Kruchten: From Waterfall to Iterative DevelopmentA tough transition for project managers, The Rational Edge, December 2000. http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/rational/library/content/RationalEdge/dec00/FromWaterfalltoIterativeDevelopmentDec00.pdf
• We have a 2-day training course, Matering Management of Iterative Development (MMID)
• Craig Larman, Agile & Iterative DevelopmentA Managers Guide, Addison-Wesley, 2004. Excellent book providing tons of research on benefits of iterative development
• Walker Royce: Software Project ManagementA Unified Framework, Addison-Wesley-Longman (1998) ISBN 0-201-30958-0
• Murray Cantor: Software Leadership: A Guide to Successful Software Development. Addison-Wesley Professional (2001) 208p. ISBN 0-201-70044-1

I hope this helps

/Per

I am not sure what you want to check with me. I am not writing the examination for IBM.

I personally do not see what has become invalid in the old 6 practices. The new ones look fine with me too. Nice paper. In aprticualr the stres on the fact that RUP need be tailored to suit the need tfo a given project and organization.

A certification process that would be so narrow minded as to rely on a closed, specific lsit of N items (the, being best practices, or roesl, or arritifact), in a certain release would be pretty dumb (in our field made up of mostly opinions and personal experience in a given context).
I hope we can expect a better view from our friends at IBM.

Moreover the concetp of "best" practice and how many there are , and why 4, 6, 7 or 12 are better than others is highly subjective. I'd rather call them good practices, since best seems to imply some kind of scientific "proof" or validation that they indeed are the 'best", which cannot be done, since, again, there are so many different kinds of softwr proejcts, in size, domain, technologies....

If your questios was actually: will P. Kruchten update his book(s) to aling with RUP 7.0, then maybe, and maybe I will only pick and chose what I actually like and understand out of 7.0, for basically many of the reasons expressed above. But not in time for you to take the exam.

Remember also that the original 6 best practices where designed driven by marketing to align with the rational software business units which produced 6 categories of tools: Requisite, Rose, Clearcase/clearquest, test tools, etc...

Good luck,

Philippe Kruchten
University of British Columbia
Vancouver, BC, Canada
pbk@ece.ubc.ca

I realize this is a dated thread but I'd like to follow up on this topic. Is the intent of RUP in these areas to communicate a high-level task/work-product but leave the actual implementation details to the practitioner?

I see Performance Engineering methods as the solution to validating an Architecture as illustrated in the Ellaboration phase.

Thoughts

Rich