Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!aplcen!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!emory!stiatl!srchtec!johnb
From: johnb@srchtec.UUCP (John Baldwin)
Newsgroups: comp.software-eng
Subject: Re: Today's Software Standards (was RE:some advice to a sw e
Message-ID: <244@srchtec.UUCP>
Date: 28 Sep 90 17:14:18 GMT
References: <15444@yunexus.YorkU.CA> <233@srchtec.UUCP> <199@smds.UUCP>
Organization: search technology, inc.
Lines: 25

In article <199@smds.UUCP> rh@smds.UUCP (Richard Harter) writes:

>Many developers are uncomfortable with the notion of controlled
>change; however my experience is that development which uses
>controlled change and which always keeps a working program(s)
>in hand is a much comfortable and reliable way to work, and that
>the resulting software is produced more quickly and more reliably.


Its a sad but funny fact that, in fact, many developers are more
comfortable with the notion of "uncontrolled change."  All too many
projects (even well-managed ones!) are planned and completed with the
view that "once its done, its done."

How many of you can remember a real project that was completed and
never changed?  [I'll admit, there must be a few.]

IMHO, the intelligent software engineer (AND his intelligent managers!)
will realise that ***the system is GOING to change***, and will
begin the project with this a-priori assumption.  We might as well
manage the alteration process at the beginning.
-- 
John T. Baldwin                     | "Pereant qui ante nos nostra dixerunt!"
Search Technology, Inc.             | (A plague on those who said our good
johnb%srchtec.uucp@mathcs.emory.edu |  things before we did!)