Re: [epf-dev] Intro page + Plus comments for all content leads++

[Ana Valente Pereira <apereira@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

One comment on the first paragraph:

Instead of having all the roles in the collaboration sub-process ( 
including the "any role" that nobody seems to like and the stakeholder 
role that seems to be passive in the process) what don't we have only 2 
roles: "team member" and "stakeholder" ?.... the other open up roles 
such as analyst, architect, developer  could extent "team member" (i 
believe that we can do that with the tool) ... and be placed at the 
corresponding sub-process. Like this we could assign to the team member 
specific collaboration and communication tasks (that we don't have yet)...

We could also add some tasks to the stakeholder to show his 
responsibilities (besides participating on the others) for instance: 
prioritize requirements  or provide feedback on the solution

One comment on the management sub-process:
it is the only one that you do not mention work products ... i don't 
know if you want to mention the work items list?

Regards

Ana

Per Kroll wrote:

> Hi,
>
> attached you find my draft description of each subprocess and the 
> foundational collaboration layer. I am writing this disconnected, so 
> cannot put it into bugzilla right now.
> The text would probably benefit from a graph for each sub-process to 
> capture the essence of that sub-process. I have not yet reflected on 
> what such a graph may look like.
>
> As I wrote the text, I made a number of comments that I hope is a good 
> read for all content leads, as well as other people writing content. I 
> e.g. suggest changes to most of the tasks in Intent and Solutions 
> Development to better reflect collaborative development, with more 
> roles involved in the various tasks. I think the counter-argument is 
> that if every role needs to participate in every task, does that not 
> only clutter the model? That would be a valid concern, but as a 
> minimum, we need to make sure that it is crystal clear to the analyst 
> that they should not only capture requirements, but that they need to 
> involve developers, architects and testers to validate the 
> requriements and ensure that they are understood. This could be done 
> through a simple change to the step "Achieve Concurrence". The same 
> type of thinking probably applies to most or at least many tasks in 
> the intent and solutions development sub-processes.
>
> Comments?
>
>
> Cheers
>
> Per Kroll
> STSM, Manager Methods: RUP / RMC
> Project Lead: Eclipse Process Framework
> Rational Software, IBM Corp
> 408-342-3815
>
>
> *Bruce Macisaac/Cupertino/IBM@IBMUS*
> Sent by: epf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
>
> 09/14/2006 09:01 PM
> Please respond to
> Eclipse Process Framework Project Developers List <epf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>
> 	
> To
> 	steve@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> cc
> 	"'Eclipse Process Framework Project Developers List'" 
> <epf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject
> 	[epf-dev] Intro page
>
>
>
> 	
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi Steve,
>
> As you recall, at Wednesday's status meeting I expressed the concern 
> that the intro graphic, while cool, introduces another set of things 
> that look a lot like the disciplines, which could be confusing.  To 
> address this concern, Per has agreed to draft up some pages for each 
> of these areas.
>
> After Sept 30, we can further explore my proposal to align these areas 
> with the disciplines.
> (For reference, here is what I had in mind - although from informal 
> discussions, it looks like it will take a while to gel):
> - rename "Intent" to be "Requirements", to match the discipline
> - Solution would have sub-disciplines of Implementation, Test, AnD, 
> and later deployment.
> - Management would have CM and Project Management, and later Environment.
> - Communication and Collaboration becomes a new discipline that 
> describes general concepts and responsibilities of all team members.
> For now, the Any Role and "submit a change request" would be in this 
> discipline.  Longer term would be general review procedures, guidance 
> on scrums, searching for reusable assets and
> providing feedback, resolving conflict, etc.)
>
>
>
> Hope that works for you.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Bruce MacIsaac
> Manager - RUP/OpenUP Content
> bmacisaa@xxxxxxxxxx
> phone: (408)863-8718
> _______________________________________________
> epf-dev mailing list
> epf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/epf-dev
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> epf-dev mailing list
> epf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/epf-dev
>