Out Of The Mouths Of Clients

[SueEllen]

Being older than you lads, I was doing agile before it was called agile (approx 2001 AD). It was then called RAD.

Some of us are female and not lads in any sense of the word.

And yes things go in cycles as those who don't remember history are doomed to repeat it. (Or change the terminology and sell it as a new fangled idea.)

[Bee]

Talking to one of the third party suppliers, trying to get a grasp of the documentation etc for the client (kinda knew the answer as I had been brought in to try and reign in some of the processes), asked about what happens if an error is found and a new version of code is created?

Word or word answer is:



I am not a BA or a Dev, but can anyone please tell me how is this even possible?!

I have gone back and asked how do they know what to build, but I am scared of the answer to be fair!

This is a project without a plan, in addition, they didn't answer your question.
If the code is wrong certainly they will blame the developer…or you.

After the requirements approval, the design documents should to be ready for review and approval before the development. This will prevent problems while coding and save time.

Good luck

[MrMarkyMark]

Being older than you lads

The Business told you what they wanted to achieve and you built them a system.

When I go out shopping on a Saturday I don't have a plan. Or a design document.

You young people are so bureaucratic I just can't get over it.

How do you know how us "lads" or "lasses" are, errrrrrr, you don't

Which is fine until you realise you have nothing signed off, just a bunch of "walking requirements", who change their minds all the time and put the delivery at risk.

Sorry, I prefer things being signed off and delivering to specification and guess what? It works

[Bee]

How do you know how us "lads" or "lasses" are, errrrrrr, you don't

Which is fine until you realise you have nothing signed off, just a bunch of "walking requirements", who change their minds all the time and put the delivery at risk.

Sorry, I prefer things being signed off and delivering to specification and guess what? It works

Can became complicated with all the documents sign off, I can imagine without them.

[Troll]

Being even older, I've seen these fads come and go, given different names for the same bollocks, I've learnt to ignore them all and it doesn't seem to have hurt

+1

[NigelJK]

I built RAD systems for eg BP and Shell. There was never any 'design'. If you'd asked me about such a thing then, we'd have had to go down the pub to mull over the consequences of such a new and fangled concept.

Well you were doing it wrong then. We still had Functional Specifications and RAD part was for the 'Development'. In essence we built 'prototypes' which we walked through with the end users (basically the screen equivalent of wireframes). These were then meant to be used to build the 'real thing'. Usually they were 'fleshed out' to become the 'real thing'.

[DimPrawn]

Being smarter, I've seen these fads come and go, given different names for the same bollocks, I've learnt to jump on every bandwagon, and it's paid off very nicely

FTFY

[suityou01]

Technical design was the original post, or lack of. Fads do come and go but Agile seems here to stay.

Like it or loathe it, any successful project needs :

A definition of "done".
A way of validating this definition.
A way of proving what was delivered is "done".

Agile really only covers part of this process.

[Cirrus]

Don't fall into the monochromatic SDLC=Good;Everything else=Evil way of thinking.

eg:

Not all projects are the same, so treat them differently

[Cirrus]

Being even older,

No way