From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: ***
X-Spam-Status: No, score=3.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50,INVALID_DATE,
	MSGID_SHORT,REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
	version=3.4.4
Xref: utzoo comp.lang.ada:5896 comp.lang.c++:14450
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!zephyr.ens.tek.com!uw-beaver!ssc-vax!dmg
From: dmg@ssc-vax (David M Geary)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: chief programmer team organizations was (c++ vs ada results)
Message-ID: <4216@ssc-bee.ssc-vax.UUCP>
Date: 28 Jun 91 16:06:19 GMT
References: <1991Jun26.005625.25608@netcom.COM> <4212@ssc-bee.ssc-vax.UUCP> <1991Jun28.001040.22237@netcom.COM>
Sender: news@ssc-vax.UUCP
Reply-To: dmg@ssc-vax.UUCP (David M Geary)
Organization: Boeing Aerospace & Electronics
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

]  Jim Showalter
]> David Geary

]>  1. Break the system down into subsystems.
]>  2. Assign small teams to each subsystem.
]>  3. Teams are responsible for design/development of subsystem.
]>  4 .Interfaces between subsystems are designed by the developers of
]>     the subsystems involved.
]
] I think we're in violent agreement on all points except possibly #4.
] I believe you want these decisions made by a very few people--if you
] have 50 subsystems (big systems have this many or more), then you
                                                           ^^^^^^^^
] either have a 50 person committee or you wind up with some architects
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
] who are responsible for the grand vision (yes, they're supposed to
] listen to what the developers have to say--they'd be idiots not to).
]
  Well, you may have 50 people who, at one time or another, will
  make contributions/decisions on the committee, but I don't think
  you will hardly ever have all 50 people contributing at once.
  When making a decision concerning architecture of the system, you
  only have developers whose subsystems are directly effected making
  decisions...

] I think 99% of this entire thread has been more a problem of nomenclature
] than of fundamental disagreement.

  Yeah, probably so, but I think most people perceived that you
  meant there would be an "elite" group of designers who turned the
  design over to a "non-elite" group of developers to "code".  While
  this was probably not what you meant, it nonetheless has hit a
  nerve.

-- 
|~~~~~~~~~~       David Geary, Boeing Aerospace, Seattle, WA.       ~~~~~~~~~~|
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|~~~~~~  Seattle:  America's most attractive city... to the *jetstream* ~~~~~~|
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|