schultz@grebyn.com (Ronald Schultz) (12/04/90)
Much has been mentioned on the net as to how the development of
OO software is significantly different than the development of
software using other approaches. And so I ask, how much
different is OO development from conventional development when
comparing OO against other approaches from a development
management perspective? Albeit from the developer's viewpoint
much is changed, but from a management perspective what has
changed?
1. For instance, how have you found configuration management
(CM) to be different ?
2. How different is your development team organization ?
3. How is quality assurance and control different ?
4. How different are your schedules and estimating when done in
an OO lifecycle vs. another approach ?
5. How are your user specifications different ?
6. If you are a contractor bidding for work, how do your OO
proposals differ from your other development proposals ?
At the November meeting of an IBM Mainframe User's Group (GUIDE),
Dave Dykstal of IBM Rochester presented on the development issues
involved in developing a cooperative processing OO interface
between the AS/400 and IBM PS/2s under OS/2. The presentation
highlighted the differences and conflicts between the development
team's spiral model of development and the rest of IBM
Rochester's waterfall lifecycle development. Simple issues such
as defining 'when is the product ready to be documented?' became
a critical management issue when injecting OO into a development
staff.
Any thoughts or comments would be appreciated. I will post a
summary to the net if there is sufficient response.
Ron Schultz
schultz@grebyn.com
614-759-3127