• Post Reply Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic
programming forums Java Mobile Certification Databases Caching Books Engineering Micro Controllers OS Languages Paradigms IDEs Build Tools Frameworks Application Servers Open Source This Site Careers Other all forums
this forum made possible by our volunteer staff, including ...
Marshals:
  • Campbell Ritchie
  • Paul Clapham
  • Ron McLeod
  • Bear Bibeault
  • Liutauras Vilda
Sheriffs:
  • Jeanne Boyarsky
  • Junilu Lacar
  • Henry Wong
Saloon Keepers:
  • Tim Moores
  • Stephan van Hulst
  • Jj Roberts
  • Tim Holloway
  • Piet Souris
Bartenders:
  • Himai Minh
  • Carey Brown
  • salvin francis

Heayweight Methodologie- RUP

 
Greenhorn
Posts: 10
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
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!
 
author
Posts: 11962
5
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
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
Posts: 14112
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

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!
 
(instanceof Sidekick)
Posts: 8791
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
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.
 
Lasse Koskela
author
Posts: 11962
5
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Originally posted by Stan James:
their methodology took up 12 shelf feet of books.


...are you sure that wasn't mythology more than methodology?
 
author
Posts: 608
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
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
 
Roses are red, violets are blue. Some poems rhyme and some don't. And some poems are a tiny ad.
Thread Boost feature
https://coderanch.com/t/674455/Thread-Boost-feature
reply
    Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic