Permeation of RUP and XP on Small and Middle-Size Projects

1
Permeation of RUP and XP on Small and Middle-Size
Projects

• KREŠIMIR FERTALJ
• University of Zagreb
• Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Computing
• Department of applied computing
• Unska 3, Zagreb 10000, CROATIA
• kresimir.fertalj_at_fer.hr

2
Introduction

• Most of the present software projects fit into
  the class of middle-sized projects
• XP is too little and firm,
• RUP is too big and universal
• for literal and strict implementation.
• Releasing and adjusting some of the directives,
  and combining ideas of both of these
  philosophies, as a logical solution for filling
  the gap between the two.

3
Overview of the RUP

• RUP - Rational Unified Process
• formerly Unified Development Process
• a universal software development framework
• provides a number of predefined templates
  (roadmaps) which model different types of
  processes suited for different types of software
  development projects
• enables the user to choose the subset of
  artefacts that will be produced and even to
  create its own artefacts
• RUP emphasises the best practices
• Iterative development, Management of
  requirements, Application of component-based
  architectures, Visual modelling, Continuous
  quality verification, Control and tracking of
  changes.

4
The RUP lifecycle

• Inception
• Determines the scope, the preliminary schedule
  and the basic architecture ? Vision document
• Elaboration
• Clarifies the system architecture, determines the
  most important requirements and risks ? Software
  Requirements Specification, Software Architecture
  Document and a refined project plan
• Construction
• Manufacturing and iterative improvement of the
  system being developed ? Development plan
• Transition
• Testing and releasing the product, fine tuning
  based on the users feedback ? Change Management

5
Iteration and phases

• Phases

Core Workflows
Requirements
Analysis
Design
Implementation
Testing
6
Overview of XP

• XP - Extreme Programming
• The values - establish the basic rules
• Communication, Simplicity, Feedback, Courage and
  Respect.
• The basic principles operating principles
• Humanity, Economics, Mutual benefit,
  Self-Similarity, Improvement, Diversity,
  Reflection, Flow, Opportunity, Redundancy,
  Failure, Quality, Baby Steps, Accepted
  Responsibility
• Practices concrete directions
• Beck recognizes Primary and Corollary practices
• some authors do some further classifications

7
RUP Practices

• Primary practices Stories (User Stories), Weekly
  Cycle, Quarterly Cycle and Slack, Sit Together,
  Whole Team, Informative Workspace, Energised Work
  (formerly Sustainable Pace), Pair programming,
  Incremental Design (comprises two former
  Refactoring and Simple Design), Test-First
  Programming (Continuous Testing), Ten-Minute
  Build, and Continuous Integration.
• Corollary practices Real Customer Involvement
  (formerly On-Site Customer), Incremental
  Deployment. Negotiated Scope Contract,
  Pay-Per-Use, Team Continuity, Shrinking Teams,
  Root-Cause Analysis, Code and Tests, Shared Code
  (formerly Collective Code Ownership), Single Code
  Base, and Daily Deployment.

8
(No Transcript)
9
XP lifecycle
10
Permeation of RUP and XP

• Best of Breed
• The majority of software is too dynamic and
  unpredictable for huge and time-consuming RUP,
  and
• software projects are too expensive and important
  to be left to ad-hoc planning in XP.
• XP
• focus set on coding, short projects (up to a
  year), small teams (up to ten), reduced
  documentation, on-site customer, pair programming
  and short releases as main risk reduction
  mechanisms.
• RUP
• a configurable process framework, adaptable, no
  limits to the project size, price or the team
  size and deployment, the main risk reduction
  mechanisms are iterations and detailed
  documentation.

11
Preliminirary Study
12
System Analysis and Design
13
System Construction
14
Transition
15
Premise

• RUP
• highly formal and structured
• providing out-of-the-box roadmaps for a number of
  project types
• does not say anything about how to actually run a
  project
• XP
• devoted to everyday life and low-level management
  of the development team
• does not insist on documentation
• does not provide project templates
• people oriented methodology, relying on human
  intelligence

16
Conclusion

• A permeation presented in the paper
• retained the four RUP alike phases in project
  lifecycle
• significantly reduced the documentation,
  selecting the artefacts necessary to support a
  little larger and less compact team than expected
  in XP
• adopts reduced XPs people-orientation and most
  of the XP practices, especially communication,
  frequent small releases, code refactoring and
  testing, etc.
• XP practice of writing tests before or at least
  in parallel with code proved to be an excellent
  risk reduction mechanism in practice.
• The proposed combination of RUP and XP
• certainly appropriate for small and middle-size
  projects
• efficiently exploits the human experience in SW
  development

17
?