Add a comment

 

Re: The conflict between agile and architecture (part 1)

A very practical scenario that happens over and over everywhere. ok ... so there is 16 weeks ( 4months) available. Fixing the Scope is the single most difficult as well as the critical piece. Scope shall then dictate the work breakdown ( Sprint plans ). If we assume it takes 2 weeks to nail down the sprint and 2 - 3 weeks of testing, it would leave us with 10-11 weeks. That's about 5 spring cycles ( 2 week each ) What goes into fixing the Scope ? 1. Gap analysis ( what is there and what is needed ). Debate around the need for all the features ( like whats wrong with Read-only DB - it may perhaps improve performance - provided it meets all business requirements). 2. Prioritization of Gaps. 3. Technology Choice ( I would go for GWT kind of technology ). 4. Usability - Wireframes by a Usability Group ( or use commonsense and come up with one ). 5. Technical changes - Transactional, real time could mean either connecting to the production DB or hot replicated slave. 6. Skill set of available team Vs recommended technology choices ( like if no one is comfortable with GWT, then settle down to struts 2.x) or so. Once Scope is thus frozen, create the product backlog and sequence the sprint plans. Plan for 2 sprints at a time and then keep making minor adjustments to the plan on a continual basis. 4 months is still a tough ask, But by proper scoping and prioritization, it doesnt have to be a big deal.

Re: The conflict between agile and architecture (part 1)


Title
Body
HTML : b, strong, i, em, blockquote, br, p, pre, a href="", ul, ol, li, sub, sup
Name
E-mail address
Website
Remember me Yes  No 

E-mail addresses are not publicly displayed, so please only leave your e-mail address if you would like to be notified when new comments are added to this blog entry (you can opt-out later).