Re: [re-online] waterfall model

From: David Lightstone (david.lightstone@prodigy.net)
Date: Wed Apr 09 2003 - 09:48:29 EST

>
>
> -------------------- Begin Original Message --------------------
>
> Message text written by INTERNET:re-online@it.uts.edu.au
>
> "It's interesting that you say that the waterfall is "... not really
> practical on projects of any size.", since it was originally elucidated by
> Royce precisely for large projects, and it remains the model (although
> significantly tailored) for most large projects to date, at least in the
> US.
>
> I would take the opposite view (perhaps partly for argument's sake), that
> the waterfall isn't really practical for small projects because of the
> documentation burden and "perceived" inflexibility that it imposes on the
> development process.
> "
>
>
> -------------------- End Original Message --------------------
>
> Hi Ian, Scotto,
>
> But all models are, by definition, 'wrong'. Every one is an abstraction
> that omits much detail for the sake of simplicity and in order to 'tell
the
> tale' and pass useful information to those with less experience.
>
> Hence, all models are also probably 'right'... to some limited extent...
> even rigorous waterfall projects contain elements of iteration, just as
> even in the most eXtreme iterative projects, it is possible to trace
series
> of sequential steps when looking at the activities to generate products at
> high levels of granularity (ie. small steps, great detail).
>
> Anyway, who cares? Few systems/software developers ever adhere to ANY
> model, do they?

There appears to be a stronger statement. Made by D L Parnas, in his very old paper Just Fake It

My interpretation being, for the Waterfall model to work correctly, you need complete a priori knowledge of the characteristics of the system being developed. Not possible. A posteriori to project completion, you can document as though you had the a priori knowledge. Too bad most organizations don't

>
>
> Best regards,
> Grant Rule
>
>


> Join us at the Software Measurement & Improvement Forum (SMIF) 14 May 2003
> at the London offices of JP Morgan Chase & Co. 60 Victoria Embankment
>
> Our next Software Measurement and Improvement Forums will be on 14-May.
> JP Morgan Chase has very kindly agreed to host the event. The forum is an
> opportunity to listen to speakers with actual experience of implementing
> metrics and undertaking process improvement. All are practitioners with
> experiences to share. Like yourself, they are actively engaged in
> implementing change and seeking the benefits of performance improvement.
>
> £160 GBP (250 EUR) + VAT mailto:SueRule@compuserve.com Tel: 01732 863760
> www.software-measurement.com www.gifpa.co.uk/events/smif/2003-05-14.html
>

> Software Measurement Services Ltd.
> 143 High Street, Edenbridge, Kent, TN8 5AX UK
> http://www.software-measurement.com/
> T:+44(0)1732-863-760
> F:+44(0)1732-864-996
> M:+44(0)7770-503-241
> E:PG_Rule@compuserve.com or PG_Rule@mac.com
>

>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------

> To send a message to this mailing list send it to re-online@it.uts.edu.au.
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, email majordomo@it.uts.edu.au with
the
> message `unsubscribe re-online' in the BODY of the mail.

To send a message to this mailing list send it to re-online@it.uts.edu.au. To unsubscribe from this mailing list, email majordomo@it.uts.edu.au with the message `unsubscribe re-online' in the BODY of the mail.

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.6 : Mon Apr 14 2003 - 09:00:09 EST