58,037 research outputs found

    Incorporating Agile with MDA Case Study: Online Polling System

    Full text link
    Nowadays agile software development is used in greater extend but for small organizations only, whereas MDA is suitable for large organizations but yet not standardized. In this paper the pros and cons of Model Driven Architecture (MDA) and Extreme programming have been discussed. As both of them have some limitations and cannot be used in both large scale and small scale organizations a new architecture has been proposed. In this model it is tried to opt the advantages and important values to overcome the limitations of both the software development procedures. In support to the proposed architecture the implementation of it on Online Polling System has been discussed and all the phases of software development have been explained.Comment: 14 pages,1 Figure,1 Tabl

    XP customer practices: A grounded theory

    Get PDF
    The Customer is a critical role in XP, but almost all XP practices are presented for developers by developers. While XP calls for Real Customer Involvement, it does not explain what XP Customers should do, nor how they should do it. Using Grounded Theory, we discovered eight customer practices used by successful XP teams: Customer Boot Camp, Customer’s Apprentice, Customer Pairing, and Programmer’s Holiday support the well-being and effectiveness of customers; Programmer On-site and Road shows support team and organization interactions; and Big Picture Up Front and Re-calibration support Customers steering the whole project. By adopting these processes, XP Customers and teams can work faster and more sustainably

    EXTREME PROGRAMMING AND RATIONAL UNIFIED PROCESS – CONTRASTS OR SYNONYMS?

    Get PDF
    The agile movement has received much attention in software engineering recently. Established methodologies try to surf on the wave and present their methodologies a being agile, among those Rational Unified Process (RUP). In order to evaluate the statements we evaluate the RUP against eXtreme Programming (XP) to find out to what extent they are similar end where they are different. We use a qualitative approach, utilizing a framework for comparison. RUP is a top-down solution and XP is a bottom-up approach. Which of the two is really best in different situations has to be investigated in new empirical studies.extreme programming

    Estimating, planning and managing Agile Web development projects under a value-based perspective

    Get PDF
    Context: The processes of estimating, planning and managing are crucial for software development projects, since the results must be related to several business strategies. The broad expansion of the Internet and the global and interconnected economy make Web development projects be often characterized by expressions like delivering as soon as possible, reducing time to market and adapting to undefined requirements. In this kind of environment, traditional methodologies based on predictive techniques sometimes do not offer very satisfactory results. The rise of Agile methodologies and practices has provided some useful tools that, combined with Web Engineering techniques, can help to establish a framework to estimate, manage and plan Web development projects. Objective: This paper presents a proposal for estimating, planning and managing Web projects, by combining some existing Agile techniques with Web Engineering principles, presenting them as an unified framework which uses the business value to guide the delivery of features. Method: The proposal is analyzed by means of a case study, including a real-life project, in order to obtain relevant conclusions. Results: The results achieved after using the framework in a development project are presented, including interesting results on project planning and estimation, as well as on team productivity throughout the project. Conclusion: It is concluded that the framework can be useful in order to better manage Web-based projects, through a continuous value-based estimation and management process.Ministerio de EconomĂ­a y Competitividad TIN2013-46928-C3-3-
    • 

    corecore