Contextualizing Agile Software Development
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Software Architecture and Agility
Agility and Architecture May 18 2010 Agility and Architecture: An Oxymoron? Philippe Kruchten Saturn May 18, 2010 Philippe Kruchten, Ph.D., P.Eng., CSDP Professor of So)ware Engineering NSERC Chair in Design Engineering Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering University of BriIsh Columbia Vancouver, BC Canada [email protected] Founder and president Kruchten Engineering Services Ltd Vancouver, BC Canada [email protected] Philippe Kruchten 1 Agility and Architecture May 18 2010 Agile & Architecture? Oil & Water? • Paradox • Oxymoron • Conflict • IncompaIbility Outline • Agility?? • SoSware architecture? • A story • Seven viewpoints on a single problem • The zipper model • A clash of two cultures • Summary Philippe Kruchten 2 Agility and Architecture May 18 2010 Agility • A definiIon – Agility is the ability to both create and respond to change in order to profit in a turbulent business environment. Jim Highsmith (2002) • CharacterisIcs – IteraIve and incremental – Small release – Collocaon – Release plan/ feature backlog – IteraIon plan/task backlog Sanjiv AugusIne (2004) Agile Values: the Agile Manifesto We have come to value: • Individuals and interacIons over process and tools, • Working soSware over comprehensive documents, • Customer collaboraIon over contract negoIaIon, • Responding to change over following a plan. That is, while there is value in the items on the right, we value the items on the leS more Source: hp://www.agilemanifesto.org/ Philippe Kruchten 3 Agility and Architecture May 18 2010 Geng at the Essence of Agility • SoSware development is a knowledge acIvity – Not producIon, manufacturing, administraIon… • The “machines” are humans • Dealing with uncertainty, unknowns, fear, distrust • Feedback loop -> – reflect on business, requirements, risks, process, people, technology • CommunicaIon and collaboraIon -> – Building trust Named Agile Methods • XP = eXtreme Programming (K. -
Reflections on Software Architecture Linda Northrop SEI Fellow
Reflections on Software Architecture Linda Northrop SEI Fellow Software Engineering Institute Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh, PA 15213 © 2016 Carnegie Mellon University Distribution Statement A: Approved for Public Release; Distribution is Unlimited Notices Copyright 2016 Carnegie Mellon University This material is based upon work funded and supported by the Department of Defense under Contract No. FA8721-05-C-0003 with Carnegie Mellon University for the operation of the Software Engineering Institute, a federally funded research and development center. Any opinions, findings and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Department of Defense. NO WARRANTY. THIS CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY AND SOFTWARE ENGINEERING INSTITUTE MATERIAL IS FURNISHED ON AN “AS-IS” BASIS. CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY MAKES NO WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, AS TO ANY MATTER INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, WARRANTY OF FITNESS FOR PURPOSE OR MERCHANTABILITY, EXCLUSIVITY, OR RESULTS OBTAINED FROM USE OF THE MATERIAL. CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY DOES NOT MAKE ANY WARRANTY OF ANY KIND WITH RESPECT TO FREEDOM FROM PATENT, TRADEMARK, OR COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT. [Distribution Statement A] This material has been approved for public release and unlimited distribution. Please see Copyright notice for non-US Government use and distribution. This material may be reproduced in its entirety, without modification, and freely distributed in written or electronic form without requesting formal permission. Permission is required for any other use. Requests for permission should be directed to the Software Engineering Institute at [email protected]. Carnegie Mellon® and CERT® are registered marks of Carnegie Mellon University. -
Comparative Study on Agile Software Development Methodologies
Global Journal of Computer Science and Technology Software & Data Engineering Volume 13 Issue 7 Version 1.0 Year 2013 Type: Double Blind Peer Reviewed International Research Journal Publisher: Global Journals Inc. (USA) Online ISSN: 0975-4172 & Print ISSN: 0975-4350 Comparative Study on Agile Software Development Method- ologies By A B M Moniruzzaman & Dr. Syed Akhter Hossain Daffodil International University, Bangladesh Abstract - Today‘s business environment is very much dynamic, and organizations are constantly changing their software requirements to adjust with new environment. They also demand for fast delivery of software products as well as for accepting changing requirements. In this aspect, traditional plan-driven developments fail to meet up these requirements. Though traditional software development methodologies, such as life cycle-based structured and object oriented approaches, continue to dominate the systems development few decades and much research has done in traditional methodologies, Agile software development brings its own set of novel challenges that must be addressed to satisfy the customer through early and continuous delivery of the valuable software. It‘s a set of software development methods based on iterative and incremental development process, where requirements and development evolve through collaboration between self-organizing, cross-functional teams that allows rapid delivery of high quality software to meet customer needs and also accommodate changes in the requirements. In this paper, we significantly indentify and describe the major factors, that Agile development approach improves software development process to meet the rapid changing business environments. We also provide a brief comparison of agile development methodologies with traditional systems development methodologies, and discuss current state of adopting agile methodologies. -
Kruchten Frog Octopus JSS V6
Paper submitted to the Journal of Software and Systems, July 2011, resubmitted November 2011. The frog and the octopus: a conceptual model of software development Philippe Kruchten University of British Columbia 2332 Main Mall Vancouver BC V6N2T9 Canada email: [email protected] phone: +1 (604) 827-5654 fax: +1 (604) 822-5949 Abstract We propose a conceptual model of software development that encompasses all approaches: traditional or agile, light and heavy, for large and small development efforts. The model identifies both the common aspects in all software development, i.e., elements found in some form or another in each and every software development project (Intent, Product, People, Work, Time, Quality, Risk, Cost, Value), as well as the variable part, i.e., the main factors that cause the very wide variations we can find in the software development world (Size, Age, Criticality, Architecture stability, Business model, Governance, Rate of change, Geographic distribution). We show how the model can be used as an explanatory theory of software development, as a tool for analysis of practices, techniques, processes, as the basis for curriculum design or for software process adoption and improvement, and to support empirical research on software development methods. This model is also proposed as a way to depolarize the debate on agile methods versus the rest-of-the-world: a unified model. Keywords: software development, conceptual model, ontology, method, software development process, software engineering, theory Visual abstract for JSS: !"#$%& !"#$%& '()*& '()*& Alternate visual abstract for JSS: Authorʼs bio: Philippe Kruchten is professor of software engineering at the University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada. -
Disciplined Agile
Disciplined Agile Jas Madhur and Scott Ambler Presentation for PMI Luxembourg November 22nd, 2016 - Chambre des Metiers, Kirchberg #pmiluxagile Agenda • Part 1 – Jas Madhur (Luxembourg) • Part 2 – Plan A - Scott Ambler (Toronto) • Part 2 – Plan B – Slides. No refunds. Free event. Even food! Sponsors. • agilepartner • Since 2004 architecting agile information systems • Don’t worry be AP! • Lux – Advisory • Since 2009 consulting company specialising in organisation and strategy Questions and comments use #pmiluxagile Part 1 - Jas Madhur – Who am I? • PMI Luxembourg – Director of Finance … 2017 + Sponsorship • Agile Practitioner / Methodologist • 1993 Iterative/Object Oriented Development (Canadian Air Traffic System) • 1997 Rational Unified Process (RUP) Development Team (IBM Rational Software) • 2004 Agile Vancouver – Dr.Philippe Kruchten • 2008 Agile Toronto – Scott Ambler • 2011 Luxembourg • AZUR ERP for Health Insurance Companies • SMEs • Agile RUP (Matisse) • PM / PMO • Write proposals and submit tenders EU institutions at infeurope • jasmadhur.blogspot.com - @jmadhur Who are you? Why are we here? • Audience • IT Project Managers • HR • Curious about what is all this ‘AGILE’ noise is about? • Know • Agile. Like teenage romance. Rampant and variable. Great experts. Let’s hope it’s safe. • Patterns and anti-patterns of agile and agility. • Do • How could the agile approach be useful throughout your organization? • Think • Being agile stimulates evolution and innovation. • Feel • Being agile and adaptive is engrained in our DNA. • It’s natural. The Context • Software/Systems Engineering • 1 Dimensional .. Waterfall .. DoD Mil-Spec 2167a • 2 Dimensional .. Iterative .. IBM Rational Unified Process (RUP) (1996) • Market Pressures of the “Internet Economy” • Small Teams • The Agile Movement • Rapid Delivery and Innovation • A Balanced Reliable Approach • Disciplined Agile DoD Mil-Spec 2167a (1989) Hardware (HW) Computer Software (CS) Unit (U) Component (C) Configuration Item (CI) Baselines WATERFALL 1. -
Understanding Architectural Assets
® IBM Software Group Understanding Architectural Assets Peter Eeles [email protected] © 2008 IBM Corporation IBM Software Group | Rational software Agenda Introduction Sources of architecture Types of architectural asset Characterizing architectural assets Automating asset reuse Conclusion 2 IBM Software Group | Rational software Inputs into this Presentation Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software Architecture (WICSA) 2008 18 – 22 February 2008, Vancouver, BC, Canada Working session: Architectural Knowledge IBM Asset Architecture Board Reusable Asset Specification Rational Asset Manager RUP for Asset-based Development © 2006 Tourism Vancouver 3 IBM Software Group | Rational software Agenda Introduction Sources of architecture Types of architectural asset Characterizing architectural assets Automating asset reuse Conclusion 4 IBM Software Group | Rational software Sources of Architecture Theft From a previous system or from technical literature Method An approach to deriving the architecture from the requirements Intuition The experience of the architect From “Mommy, Where Do Software Architectures Come From?”, Philippe Kruchten 1st International Workshop on Architectures for Software Systems, Seattle, 1995 5 IBM Software Group | Rational software Agenda Introduction Sources of architecture Types of architectural asset Characterizing architectural assets Automating asset reuse Conclusion 6 IBM Software Group | Rational software What Types of Architectural Asset are there? Reference Design Architecture -
The Software Architect -And the Software Architecture Team
The Software Architect -and the Software Architecture Team Philippe Kruchten Rational Software, 650 West 41st Avenue #638, Vancouver, B.C., V5Z 2M9 Canada pbk@ rational. com Key words: Architecture, architect, team, process Abstract: Much has been written recently about software architecture, how to represent it, and where design fits in the software development process. In this article I will focus on the people who drive this effort: the architect or a team of architects-the software architecture team. Who are they, what special skills do they have, how do they organise themselves, and where do they fit in the project or the organisation? 1. AN ARCHITECT OR AN ARCHITECTURE TEAM In his wonderful book The Mythical Man-Month, Fred Brooks wrote that a challenging project must have one architect and only one. But more recently, he agreed that "Conceptual integrity is the vital property of a software product. It can be achieved by a single builder, or a pair. But that is too slow for big products, which are built by teams."' Others concur: "The greatest architectures are the product of a single mind or, at least, of a very small, carefully structured team."2 More precisely: "Every project should have exactly one identifiable architect, although for larger projects, the principal architect should be backed up by an architecture team of modest size."3 1 Keynote address, ICSE-17, Seattle, April1995 2 Rechtin 1991 , p. 22 3 Booch 1996, p. 196 The original version of this chapter was revised: The copyright line was incorrect. This has been corrected. The Erratum to this chapter is available at DOI: 10.1007/978-0-387-35563-4 35 P. -
110707 What Colours Is Your Backlog Boston 2Up.Pptx
Agile New England July 2011 Agility and Architecture or: What colours is your backlog? Philippe Kruchten July 7, 2011 Philippe Kruchten, Ph.D., P.Eng., CSDP Professor of So*ware Engineering NSERC Chair in Design Engineering Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering University of BriLsh Columbia Vancouver, BC Canada [email protected] Founder and president Kruchten Engineering Services Ltd Vancouver, BC Canada [email protected] Co founder and past-chair Copyright © 2011 Philippe Kruchten 2 Copyright © 2011 Philippe Kruchten 1 Agile New England July 2011 Outline 1. The frog and the octopus 2. Architecture and agility 3. Release planning 4. Technical debt 5. Architecture, agility,… revisited Copyright © 2011 Philippe Kruchten 5 A Conceptual Model of SoYware Development 4 key concepts, 5 key aributes . Intent . Time . Product . Value . Quality . Work . Cost . Risk . People Copyright © 2011 Philippe Kruchten 8 Copyright © 2011 Philippe Kruchten 2 Agile New England July 2011 Intent, Work, People, Product Copyright © 2011 Philippe Kruchten 9 Frog: “All projects are the same” Value Value Cost Cost Copyright © 2011 Philippe Kruchten 10 Copyright © 2011 Philippe Kruchten 3 Agile New England July 2011 Copyright © 2011 Philippe Kruchten 11 Octopus: “All projects are different!” Size Domain, Age of Degree of Industry the CriLcality Innovaon system Rate of Business change Context model Gover Stable architec nance Corporate & Team ture Organizaonal Naonal Culture distribu Maturity on Copyright © 2011 Philippe Kruchten 12 Copyright © 2011 Philippe Kruchten 4 Agile New England July 2011 SW Dev. Project: Tension between Intent and Product Intent Work V Product Copyright © 2011 Philippe Kruchten T 13 Iteraons Copyright © 2011 Philippe Kruchten 14 Copyright © 2011 Philippe Kruchten 5 Agile New England July 2011 Outline 1. -
The Past, Present, and Future for Software Architecture
focusguest editors’ introduction The Past, Present, and Future of Software Architecture Philippe Kruchten, University of British Columbia Henk Obbink, Philips Research Europe Judith Stafford, Tufts University his special issue celebrates 10 years of software architecture con- ferences and workshops and the 10th anniversary of the first IEEE Software special issue on the topic in November 1995. We T aim to address the latest thinking about creating, capturing, and 22 IEEE SOFTWARE Published by the IEEE Computer Society 0740-7459/06/$20.00 © 2006 IEEE using software architecture throughout a soft- ■ Representation: How do we produce ware system’s life. The articles we’ve chosen durable artifacts to communicate architec- cover innovative methods and techniques ture to humans or machines? The concept emerging from research to support software ■ Economics: What architectural issues drive architecture practice. They also emphasize the business decisions? of software methods, techniques, tools, and software engi- architecture neering principles that support organizations And certainly software architecture is tied as a distinct taking an architecture-centric approach to closely to other disciplines and communities, software development. such as software design (in general), software discipline reuse, systems engineering and system architec- started to What is software architecture? ture, enterprise architecture, reverse engineer- Software architecture involves ing, requirements engineering, and quality. emerge in 1990. ■ the structure and organization by which A brief history of software modern system components and subsys- architecture tems interact to form systems, and Looking back in time will help us position ■ the properties of systems that can best be software architecture’s current status and future designed and analyzed at the system level. -
Disciplined Agile Delivery Enterprise Transformation Coach Helping to Create Agile and Lean Enterprises Around the World
Governance, Phases, and Milestones are not Agile Dirty Words! Mark Lines, Scott Ambler + Associates Co-creator of Disciplined Agile Delivery Enterprise Transformation Coach Helping to create Agile and Lean enterprises around the world @Mark_Lines © Scott Ambler + Associates 1 DAD Has Caught On! - Organizations using Disciplined Agile Delivery (DAD) © Scott Ambler + Associates 2 Disciplined Agile Delivery (DAD) is a process decision framework The key characteristics of DAD: – People-first – Goal-driven – Hybrid agile – Learning-oriented – Full delivery lifecycle – Solution focused – Risk-value lifecycle – Enterprise aware © Scott Ambler + Associates 3 DAD is a Hybrid Framework SAFe DevOps …and more Outside In Dev. “Traditional” Agile Data Extreme Unified Process Agile Modeling Programming Scrum Kanban Lean DAD leverages proven strategies from several sources, providing a decision framework to guide your adoption and tailoring of them in a context-driven manner. © Scott Ambler + Associates 4 DAD is Goal-Driven, Not Prescriptive © Scott Ambler + Associates 5 © Scott Ambler + Associates 6 Functional Requirements: Potential Model Types Usage Domain Epic/User Story Domain/Conceptual Model Persona Logical Data Model (LDM) Usage Scenario UML Class Diagram Story Mapping UML Component Diagram UML Use Case Diagram User Interface (UI) Process Value Stream Map UI Flow Diagram Business Process Model UI Prototype (Low Fidelity) Data Flow Diagram (DFD) UI Prototype (High Fidelity) Flow Chart UI Specification UML Activity Diagram UML State Chart General -
An Analysis on Waterfall and RUP Models
Journal of Engineering, Computing and Architecture ISSN NO: 1934-7197 An Analysis on Waterfall and RUP Models Dr. K. Sunil Manohar Reddy Associate Professor, Department of CSE, Matrusri Engineering College, Hyderabad, Telangana. [email protected] Abstract: Two of the vastly used software engineering processes are Waterfall model and Rational Unified Process (RUP) model. The waterfall model is a classical model of software engineering. It is used in governmental projects as well as many major companies associated with software engineering. RUP is a unified model used for large business applications. The main concern in this research is to represent the mentioned models of software development and compare them to show pros and cons of each model. Keywords: Waterfall Model, Unified Process Model, Agile Models 1. Introduction Computer is considered as a time saving mechanism and its progress helps in executing long, complex, repeated processes at a high speed and short time. Noticeably, the number of companies that produce software programs for the purpose of facilitating works of offices, administrations, banks, etc., has increased recently which results in the difficulty of enumerating such companies. During the last five decades, software has been developed from a tool used for solving a problem to a product in itself. Software consists of instructions and programs that contain a collection that has been established to be a part of software engineering procedures [1]. Moreover, the aim of software engineering is to create a suitable work -
Quality in an Agile World Software
TALKING POINTS Quality is an inherent aspect of true agile software development. The majority of agilists take a test-driven approach to development where they write a unit test Quality in an before they write the domain code to fulfill that unit test, with the end result being that they have a regression unit test suite at all Agile World times. They also consider acceptance tests as first-class requirements artifact, not only promoting regular stakeholder validation of BY SCOTT AMBLER their work but also their active inclusion in Ambysoft, Inc. the modeling effort itself. Agilists refactor their source code and database schema to keep their work at the highest possible qual- ity at all times. The challenge for quality professionals is that agilists work in a highly INTRODUCTION collaborative and evolutionary (iterative and Modern software processes are evolutionary, iterative, and incremental) manner, often requiring tradi- incremental in nature. This includes processes such as Rational tional quality professionals to change their Unified Process (RUP) (Kruchten 2004), Extreme Programming approach. (XP) (Beck 2000), Enterprise Unified Process (EUP) (Ambler, Key words: agile model driven development, Nalbone, and Vizdos 2005), and rapid application development agile software development, collaborative (RAD), to name a few. Furthermore, many modern processes development, evolutionary, incremental are agile, which for the sake of simplicity I will characterize as development, iterative development, refac- toring, software processes, test-driven both evolutionary and highly collaborative in nature. The fun- development damental nature of software development is changing, and qual- ity professionals must change with it. In this article I introduce SQP References readers to common agile software development techniques and The Role of Testers in the Agile Methods argue that they lead to software that proves in practice to be of much higher quality than what traditional software teams usu- vol.