Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Qt Developers Discuss What To Do With All Their "P1" Priority Bugs

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #51
    And you are right, I have come across many who can recite the theory of something, but do not understand nor can they put it into practice.

    And for the record, I am not a PMP, but I have managed many large scale projects.
    Nor, am I. No, one needs to have PMP certification, if one has a healthy chunk of common sense.

    I‘ve managed projects for a decade prior to get in touch with PMP or IPMA, haven’t seen a reason to wander into this region.
    If the organisation doesn‘t live the principle behind, there is just no value.
    Hench, the same is valid for the hard skills, where I educated me primarily.

    Comment


    • #52
      Originally posted by f0rmat View Post

      It was a joke. Of course any type of any development or any project at all requires QA/QC. My comment was only directed at the fact that so many things that I see (and I am not a developer) are so focused on "speed" and "agility" that they lose focus on "quality" "usability" "assessment" and "verification." And you are right, I have come across many who can recite the theory of something, but do not understand nor can they put it into practice.

      And for the record, I am not a PMP, but I have managed many large scale projects.
      Isn't there that nice little triangle - Price, Quality, Speed (of delivery)? Pick two. Many projects unfortunately pick price and speed, because that want it yesterday and don't want to pay for it. But for some reason they still complain when you deliver an untested pile of sh*t.

      Comment


      • #53
        aksdb

        The triangle has 4 properties, if you take just 2 sides/edges the 3rd & 4th vanishes.
        Where you place the first 3 properties is irrelevant, the area of the triangle represents the 4th property.
        So you are missing the scope which is the 4th. Speed (of delivery) is time available/needed.

        It’s works like the fire triangle, where to have/the size of a fire is the area of the triangle.
        Take one side away to extinguish the fire, which in pm means to have no product.
        Shrink/expand the sides to control the size of the fire, control the product properties over the enclosed areas, if one is limited the rest has to be adjusted.

        If you tell projects just take 2 sides, means they don’t want to have a product.

        Comment


        • #54
          _ONH_ Maybe I translated the metaphor wrong. If you want it cheap and fast, you get bad quality. If you want it good and cheap, it will take ages. If you want it good and fast, it will be expensive. You can't get it fast, in top quality while being cheap.

          Comment


          • #55
            Yes.

            Lower the cash and/or time below the minimal limit then quality is nowhere sane.

            You can’t arbitrary choose the properties, since they are dependent of each other, and this not in a linear way.

            cost and quality are related variables, the relation itself is further related to the time you want to finish the product within.

            You have to finde a balance between cost/time/quality that the triangle encompasses a working product.

            like with the fire you have boundaries which you can’t cross, without to extinguish it.

            if you cut oxygen to low, even if there is enough wood and heath, there won’t be a sustained fire
            if you cut wood to low but you have plenty of heat and oxygen, there won’t be a sustained fire.
            if you have no heat, but plenty of wood and oxygen there will never be fire at all.

            After all you want to have a fire sustaining with enough heat to pull out. Which is the product.

            You habe to place enough wood (man years, time to implement) and and an appropriate amount of oxygen (money) and as third element „regulate the heat“ (QA) you take out to have a sustained fire.

            The heat you can pull out is the stream of finished sub features, which summe up to your product, which defines your release cycle if it is feature based, if it is time based the number of features ready to release is dependent onto the sub feature stream.

            You can accelerate the heat output (sub feature stream), with putting more wood (work time) into the fire but while doing so, you have to adjust the amount of oxygen (money per timeframe) to accelerate the fire and taking precaution (QA) to retain enough heat, the amount changes dependent of the wood, left to keep the fire going.

            While you change the volume of wood (parallel work) in the fire the required amount of oxygen (money) per volume of wood (man hour) changes, cause it is dependent to the open surface. (work synchronization).
            There is no way to get a working product below its price.
            There is also no responsible way to cut QA. Not doing QA results in way higher product maintenance cost.
            If the customer comprehends enough and rightful enforces the fixes over warranty, and hasn’t signed a silly per effort contract, instead of his service&maintenance contract.

            If a product is cheap is not determined by its cost.
            The cheapness of development is determined by its ROI, if you can selling more through earlier release the product can get relatively cheaper.
            This even if the cost of the product development is higher through more synchronization effort required within the development.

            So you can get it fast, top quality and cheap.
            But you might not get it with a cheap initial development price.
            A product with high price and low maintenance, can be way cheaper than a low price product with high maintenance cost.

            Comment

            Working...
            X