aspose file tools*
The moose likes Agile and Other Processes and the fly likes Heayweight Methodologie- RUP Big Moose Saloon
  Search | Java FAQ | Recent Topics | Flagged Topics | Hot Topics | Zero Replies
Register / Login
JavaRanch » Java Forums » Engineering » Agile and Other Processes
Bookmark "Heayweight Methodologie- RUP" Watch "Heayweight Methodologie- RUP" New topic
Author

Heayweight Methodologie- RUP

Shazia Parveen
Greenhorn

Joined: Dec 19, 2004
Posts: 10
Hi all,

Need help on this:-
'The Rational Unified Process (RUP) is often considered to be a 'heavyweight' process. To what extent is this true???
What RUP chracteristics make it heavyweight?

Help will very much be appreciated!
Lasse Koskela
author
Sheriff

Joined: Jan 23, 2002
Posts: 11962
    
    5
The appearance of RUP as being heavyweight generally comes from the way it being applied or "instantiated", meaning that the people in charge of devising a process instance based on what RUP, the process framework has to offer, err too much on the heavy side, resulting in a document-driven process with lots of sign-offs and gates to pass through. I'd like to think that most all of these people do so with good intentions but, in my experience, the RUP instance that results from all those good intentions and the "hey, this sounds good -- we'll do that as well" insights has always been way too rigid and cumbersome for the project it was to be applied to.

Often resulting in nobody following the process but instead trying to circumvent it as much as possible...


Author of Test Driven (2007) and Effective Unit Testing (2013) [Blog] [HowToAskQuestionsOnJavaRanch]
Ilja Preuss
author
Sheriff

Joined: Jul 11, 2001
Posts: 14112
Originally posted by Lasse Koskela:
The appearance of RUP as being heavyweight generally comes from the way it being applied or "instantiated", meaning that the people in charge of devising a process instance based on what RUP, the process framework has to offer, err too much on the heavy side, resulting in a document-driven process with lots of sign-offs and gates to pass through. I'd like to think that most all of these people do so with good intentions but, in my experience, the RUP instance that results from all those good intentions and the "hey, this sounds good -- we'll do that as well" insights has always been way too rigid and cumbersome for the project it was to be applied to.


I guess that it feels more safe to err on the heavyweight side - doing too much might hurt less than doing too little.

In fact that is true - and a problem! Because doing too much hurts less, it is also harder to notice and correct. If you do too little, you will most often notice very early. From the perspective of *iterating* to a good process, it is therefore more safe to start with too little!


The soul is dyed the color of its thoughts. Think only on those things that are in line with your principles and can bear the light of day. The content of your character is your choice. Day by day, what you do is who you become. Your integrity is your destiny - it is the light that guides your way. - Heraclitus
Stan James
(instanceof Sidekick)
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jan 29, 2003
Posts: 8791
Our team was taught RUP by Rational consultants, on site for most of 1996. They definitely gave it a heavy flavor. Nowadays I'd bet you'd get a different picture.

Also in 1996 I interviewed with a manager who had just come off the Seawolf submarine project, and was proud that their methodology took up 12 shelf feet of books. I had just started reading about CMM and such and I was pretty impressed. Nowadays I'd run like hell.


A good question is never answered. It is not a bolt to be tightened into place but a seed to be planted and to bear more seed toward the hope of greening the landscape of the idea. John Ciardi
Lasse Koskela
author
Sheriff

Joined: Jan 23, 2002
Posts: 11962
    
    5
Originally posted by Stan James:
their methodology took up 12 shelf feet of books.

...are you sure that wasn't mythology more than methodology?
Scott Ambler
author
Ranch Hand

Joined: Dec 12, 2003
Posts: 608
You might find Skinnier RUP to be of interest.

RUP can be instantiated to be very slim, but the reality is that most organizations choose to instantiate it as a HW process. IMHO that is almost always a very serious mistake.

- Scott


<a href="http://www-306.ibm.com/software/rational/bios/ambler.html" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Scott W. Ambler</a><br />Practice Leader Agile Development, IBM Rational<br /> <br />Now available: <a href="http://www.ambysoft.com/books/refactoringDatabases.html" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Refactoring Databases: Evolutionary Database Design</a>
 
I agree. Here's the link: http://aspose.com/file-tools
 
subject: Heayweight Methodologie- RUP