XP, the Agile Alliance, and RUP

XP, the Agile Alliance, and RUP

Post by Sinan Alhi » Mon, 13 Aug 2001 14:19:17



The following paper may be of interest:

*  "XP, the Agile Alliance, and RUP"
(http://home.earthlink.net/~salhir/#xpaarup)

This paper elucidates the reality beyond the surface of the debate between
heavyweight approaches and lightweight or "agile" approaches by delineating
between the Unified Modeling Language (UML) and computer programming
languages, deciphering the concepts of "weight" and "agility" relative to
methodology and process, and exploring and bridging the chasm between XP,
the Agile Alliance, and RUP to conclude that *RUP is a more massive but more
agile methodology than XP, from which appropriately weighted and more agile
processes than XP may be derived, with which more agile projects than XP may
be executed*, and given RUP's broad scope, breadth and depth, and
flexibility as a process framework and given XP's collection of practices,
*the chasm is bridged via applying RUP, as a process framework, within which
XP, as a collection of practices, may be leveraged*.

I welcome your comments.

Thank you.

Sincerely,
Sinan Si Alhir

WWW:   http://home.earthlink.net/~salhir
--- --- ---
Read what people are saying about "UML in a Nutshell" (Comments and
Feedback) [http://home.earthlink.net/~salhir/#umlinanutshell]

 
 
 

XP, the Agile Alliance, and RUP

Post by Sinan Alhi » Wed, 15 Aug 2001 09:19:09


Just a note regarding the paper "XP, the Agile Alliance, and RUP".

Apologies for the broad/repetitive distribution -- but feedback has been
overly extensive.

This paper is *not* about XP *vs.* RUP, but about XP *and* RUP together ----
it appears that when people see the words XP and RUP in the same title or
sentence, they assume its a *vs.* rather than an *and*.

This paper is *not intended to offend anyone* (only explicate the facts as
they appear) but *is intended to be reconciliatory*, in better delineating
between the Unified Modeling Language (UML) and computer programming
languages, deciphering the concepts of "weight" and "agility" relative to
methodology and process, and exploring and bridging the chasm between XP,
the Agile Alliance, and RUP.

Announcements of this paper do not constitute the whole paper!

0.  Abstract

"Some may even [and some may NOT] venture to claim that the debate has
reached climactic proportions" based on "language and tone".

1.  Introduction

Its all about "culture", "people", "processes", "tools", a "common goal and
a shared vision".

2.  Language

"No 'silver bullets'" -- its all about "knowledge", "societies", "cultures",
"social structures", and "language".

2a.  The Unified Modeling Language (UML)

This language focuses across the lifecycle perspectives (beginning, middle,
and end) and "layers of abstraction".

2b.  Computer Programming Languages

These types of languages focuses on a subset of the lifecycle perspectives
(end) and "layers of abstraction".

3.  Methodology and Process

There are process frameworks (methodologies), process instances (processes),
and projects -- its all about cultural values, principles, techniques, and
practices.

3a.  Weight

We can consider the mass of a methodology, the mass of a process instance,
and the weight of a process instance.
We can consider massive methodologies and minute methodologies.
We can consider lightweight processes and heavyweight processes.

3b.  Agility

We can consider operational, tactical, and strategic capabilities.
We can consider the agility of a methodology, the agility of a process
instance, and the agility of a project.

4.  The Chasm

The chasm between RUP and XP has three dimensions: Process-vs-People,
Documentation-vs-Code, and Predictive-vs-Adaptive.
But, "the issue of weight *cannot* simply be reduced to people *or* process,
documentation *or* code, or being predictive *or* adaptive, but must be a
*mixture of all aspects*."

4a.  RUP and XP

RUP and XP are similar (structurally and semantically) --- dynamically
likewise.

4b.  The Agile Alliance

There has been emphasis on the mass of a methodology and agility of a
project (independent of the other characteristics).
Historically (given the market dynamics), this is NOT unanticipated -- for
the Agile alliance members to classify themselves as "anarchists".

4c.  Bridging the Chasm

Its not about "fear" but "a mixture of all aspects".
The three dimensions (Process-vs-People, Documentation-vs-Code, and
Predictive-vs-Adaptive) apply to RUP and XP, but are dependent on the
practitioners applying them.

5.  Conclusion

It "is *not* simply either RUP *or* XP" but RUP *and* XP to "bridge the
chasm".


> The following paper may be of interest:

> *  "XP, the Agile Alliance, and RUP"
> (http://home.earthlink.net/~salhir/#xpaarup)

> This paper elucidates the reality beyond the surface of the debate between
> heavyweight approaches and lightweight or "agile" approaches by
delineating
> between the Unified Modeling Language (UML) and computer programming
> languages, deciphering the concepts of "weight" and "agility" relative to
> methodology and process, and exploring and bridging the chasm between XP,
> the Agile Alliance, and RUP to conclude that *RUP is a more massive but
more
> agile methodology than XP, from which appropriately weighted and more
agile
> processes than XP may be derived, with which more agile projects than XP
may
> be executed*, and given RUP's broad scope, breadth and depth, and
> flexibility as a process framework and given XP's collection of practices,
> *the chasm is bridged via applying RUP, as a process framework, within
which
> XP, as a collection of practices, may be leveraged*.

> I welcome your comments.

> Thank you.

> Sincerely,
> Sinan Si Alhir

> WWW:   http://home.earthlink.net/~salhir
> --- --- ---
> Read what people are saying about "UML in a Nutshell" (Comments and
> Feedback) [http://home.earthlink.net/~salhir/#umlinanutshell]


 
 
 

1. XP, the Agile Alliance, and RUP

The following paper may be of interest:

*  "XP, the Agile Alliance, and RUP"
(http://home.earthlink.net/~salhir/#xpaarup)

This paper elucidates the reality beyond the surface of the debate between
heavyweight approaches and lightweight or "agile" approaches by delineating
between the Unified Modeling Language (UML) and computer programming
languages, deciphering the concepts of "weight" and "agility" relative to
methodology and process, and exploring and bridging the chasm between XP,
the Agile Alliance, and RUP to conclude that *RUP is a more massive but more
agile methodology than XP, from which appropriately weighted and more agile
processes than XP may be derived, with which more agile projects than XP may
be executed*, and given RUP's broad scope, breadth and depth, and
flexibility as a process framework and given XP's collection of practices,
*the chasm is bridged via applying RUP, as a process framework, within which
XP, as a collection of practices, may be leveraged*.

I welcome your comments.

Thank you.

Sincerely,
Sinan Si Alhir

WWW:   http://home.earthlink.net/~salhir
--- --- ---
Read what people are saying about "UML in a Nutshell" (Comments and
Feedback) [http://home.earthlink.net/~salhir/#umlinanutshell]

2. Email Help!

3. Black & White Box, Specs, Testing & XP/Alliance

4. KVM for Mac / PC? Advice needed.

5. The Nature of Knowing in UP, XP/Alliance, Other

6. Ethernet in a building

7. RUP vs XP

8. Pennsylvania Status - Over 99% Complete

9. Is XP an instance of RUP - beating a dead horse

10. Offshore Development - RUP or XP?

11. Process question - Trying to move a document driven organization to Risk-Driven/RUP/XP

12. Is RUP, RAD or XP even an option?

13. XP and Agile Methodologies Conference