Re: Holy Smoke!

alcesteatxmissiondot_at_com.or.net wrote in message news:<bjq6b6$jq3$1_at_terabinaries.xmission.com>...

> I think your comments can be better attributed to XP and other light
> methodologies which specifically offer alternatives to artifacts and design
> documents, and replace them with best practice guidelines they claim make
> them unnecessary.

No. My comments are directed to ANY methodology that claims to approach design guidelines by applying cookie cutters.

> Ambler, Cockburn, and their group are more pragmatic,

that's news to me...

> and are trying to come up with processes and practices that pull the most
> value out of the techniques that already exists without getting bogged
> down by them.

what techniques "already exist" in their approach? Last time I looked at Ambler&UML&Co, they were claiming that everything before was wrong and they had the new solution to the world (and brewing coffee). NOT ONE person in their group has ANY prior experience of use of prior technology. They are all born and bred from the OO movement of the early 90s, with NOT A SINGLE gram of prior IT experience anywhere.

I can't see where their techniques are based on any prior existing anything. Unless you consider that "patterns" are design solutions. With which I disagree most strongly: they are possible solutions for *development*. In one narrow environment: J2EE. They never were intended to replace general IT design.

The problem with these OO people is always the same: they are hell bent on making the entire world fit into a cookie cutter mould. Completely forgetting the vast majority of IT out there does NOT need anywhere near the complexity and overhead of what they promote.

They confuse one very narrow field of applied IT with the world in general. And they refuse point blank to acknowledge the validity of anything that is not their view. That's why they end up forgetting the most fundamental rules. Like KISS.

>
> There's no central arbitration of taste, so you might not like Ambler's
> models or Cockburn's use cases, but they're OK with that.

I'm quite sure they are. The whole show has gone on for so long very few around still remember we didn't need 5000 pages to define a design for a shopping cart 10 years ago. And it worked as well as any new design.

Cheers
Nuno Souto
wizofoz2k_at_yahoo.com.au.nospam Received on Thu Sep 11 2003 - 16:46:06 CDT