The software planning process

[MrRolf]

Well, forgive me this out of topic thing, but I did not find any appropriate
groups to this discussion.

I was wondering how much the programmers here assign their total project
duration to the planning process.

Are most of you using UML in planning process?

Have some of you gained any experience due to productivity by extending the
planning process?

The reason I ask is that I’ve read an article about the Japanese way of planning:
80% planning, 20% coding
In the Scandinavic model, about: 33% planning, 33% coding, 33% correcting


Thanks again

[Randy Charles Morin]

That Japanese model doesn't seem very realistic.

As for UML. A lot of people use UML these days. Pretty much everywhere I've worked for the last 5+ years. But most people don't know
how to use UML and there they just waste time drawing pretty pictures before coding something completely different.
--
Randy Charles Morin
http://www.kbcafe.com

Feel free to contact me by private email or messenger
randy@kbcafe.com
morin_randy@hotmail.com

"MrRolf" <rolf@ctrl-it.no> wrote in message news:3ce92e20$1@10.1.10.29...
>
> Well, forgive me this out of topic thing, but I did not find any appropriate
> groups to this discussion.
>
> I was wondering how much the programmers here assign their total project
> duration to the planning process.
>
> Are most of you using UML in planning process?
>
> Have some of you gained any experience due to productivity by extending the
> planning process?
>
> The reason I ask is that I've read an article about the Japanese way of planning:
> 80% planning, 20% coding
> In the Scandinavic model, about: 33% planning, 33% coding, 33% correcting
>
>
> Thanks again
>

[Guy Smith]

>The reason I ask is that I’ve read an article about the Japanese way of
planning:
>80% planning, 20% coding
>In the Scandinavic model, about: 33% planning, 33% coding, 33% correcting

I'd guestimate most North American development models use about 20% upfront
planning. 60% goes into staged releases with each release having its own
elements of planning, coding and correcting involved. The rest is misc activities.
XP probably is more on the extreme side, doing very little up-front planning
(any XP people want to guess what percent?).

I'd love to read the Japanese article if you have a link to it. I agree
that it doesn't sound too realistic. Sounds like an extreme waterfall method.
I cannot see how this would work. The plan would be out of date and incorrect
before coding started.

Guy

[Jim]

i agree.

the vast majority of small to medium size software companies dealing in
bespoke solutions, plan as far as contract signing, before going straight
into development, with little or no further planning.

i think it is fair to spend 10 % of your time creating a conceptual model,
but as is the case so much these days, developing is itself a learning
process, and an iterative design of the code, inside of the conceptual model
boundaries often works best for me.

it would be really good to have the time to finish all the class and
collaboration diagrams before development starts, but the realism is that
clients often change their minds, the goalposts change a little, and your
designs need updating. if you don't update them, you might as well delete
them.

these diagrams usually get finished after release for documentation
purposes.

does any one go through the same process?



"Guy Smith" <sdf@sdf.com> wrote in message news:3ced3c16$1@10.1.10.29...
>
>
> >The reason I ask is that I've read an article about the Japanese way of
> planning:
> >80% planning, 20% coding
> >In the Scandinavic model, about: 33% planning, 33% coding, 33% correcting
>
> I'd guestimate most North American development models use about 20%
upfront
> planning. 60% goes into staged releases with each release having its own
> elements of planning, coding and correcting involved. The rest is misc
activities.
> XP probably is more on the extreme side, doing very little up-front
planning
> (any XP people want to guess what percent?).
>
> I'd love to read the Japanese article if you have a link to it. I agree
> that it doesn't sound too realistic. Sounds like an extreme waterfall
method.
> I cannot see how this would work. The plan would be out of date and
incorrect
> before coding started.
>
> Guy