Re: [Sheflug] Re: Topic for a Meeting

[Craig Andrews <xxxxx [at] xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wednesday 10 July 2002 20:26, you exclaimed:
> But in practice you end up messing around to follow the rules such as
> classes should be small. Ok perhaps they should be but you start to
> loose the business logic and then forget about documentation etc. Also
> some of the later steps of the Discovery Process seems to be missing
> explanations and reasons.

This isn't a failing of UML because, as Will pointed out, it is purely a 
notation, not a process. Any failing of the project planning, design, or 
implementation is a problem of the methodologies being used, not the language 
used to describe it. I could blame my lack of understanding of the finer 
points of thermodynamics on the English language, because it hasn't been used 
to adequately explain it to me :)

That's one reason I suggested an OSS/Free Software project management talk, 
rather than purely UML.

Craig
___________________________________________________________________

Sheffield Linux User's Group -
http://www.sheflug.co.uk/mailfaq.html

  GNU the choice of a complete generation.