| Subprocesses in the OpenUP/Basic Published Process [message #23091] |
Thu, 09 November 2006 19:53 |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
When you look at the page "Introduction to OpenUP/Basic", you see the
attractive OpenUP logo with the 4 subprocesses (Management, Intent,
Solution, Collaboration). We also have 4 concepts that describe these
subprocesses. However there's nothing else in the published process that
uses or references this concept. The subprocesses are important packages
in the Composer plug-in, but currently they don't have any meaning at
the level of the published process. In other words, they don't seem to
provide value to practitioners.
A lot of us like this logo, but the question is, what do we do with it?
If it provides value we should leverage the concept, if it doesn't we
should probably eliminate it. What do people think?
Here are some possible options for dealing with the subprocess issue:
* Remove the logo and concepts. Refer to the subprocesses only as
packages in the plug-in that only process engineers will care about.
* Keep the logo and remove the concepts. Treat the logo as a nice
marketing artifact; a visual reminder that you're looking at OpenUP.
* Keep the logo and concepts, and modify the tree browser to
incorporate the notion of subprocesses. This might include
organizing the disciplines and artifacts under subprocesses
instead of a Disciplines node. The question is, does this provide
any real value?
* Don't expose disciplines like Requirements Management , PM,
Implementation, etc. Package everything under subprocesses. This
would simplify the look of OpenUP, but the disciplines are well
known software development concepts that might be missed by
practitioners.
* ... do something else that leverages the notion of subprocesses to
bring value to the practitioners.
Jim Ruehlin
jruehlin@us.ibm.com
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.02811 seconds
Home