A classic debate. It comes up often. Unfortunately, it’s a source of confusion that causes many teams to shy away from staffing, creating, or managing any formal requirements processes. There’s a discussion on Seilevel’s forum where this has been brought up again, and it’s shaping up to be a fine grudge match here in Austin. We can’t let the other folks have all the fun, so we’ll chime in too.

Background:

In our previous post, Sample use case examples, we created two informal use cases. The use cases were written to support product requirements defined as part of a project to reduce test suite maintenace costs. In this post, we will define functional requirements that support these use cases. This process is an example of using structured requirements, applied to a small real world project.

We talked about informal use cases a while ago in our use case series. Over a series of posts, we are demonstrating the process of defining a software product. The next step, and subject of this post, is the creation of informal use cases to support the defined goals for the software.

A real world example of converting from an MRD to a PRD. This is the process of translating from a market-requirements view of the product to a product-requirements view of the product.

This is the second in a three-part post about using tags as a means to organize an automated test suite.

Part 2 of this post can be read as a standalone article. If it were, it would be titled Top five problems with test automation suites. If you’re only reading this post and not parts 1 and 3, pretend that this is the title.

Cote’ recently posted a good comparison of the features of Enterprise Software versus Consumer Software. Although we may not agree with all the items in his lists (consumer software can have a login, and very often does have upgrade paths), we do appreciate the general classification. And we really like his insight:

A while ago, we asked you to send us links to good blogs. Jeff Kinsey sent us a link to his blog, Ski’s throughput on command. We found this post on logical thinking processes which is good. Thanks Ski for sending us the link!

Their post discusses the differences between causality and correlation of events.

This post is a follow-up to our previous case study on incorporating unit testing into an existing team’s development environment. The case study is based on a real solution that has already started reaping rewards for our client, and is gaining momentum. We’re now looking at making it easier for the development team to maintain this test suite, and proposing some extensions - including a form of tagging.

We’ve upgraded our theme!

The new look should provide much better support for users with larger monitors, while still supporting folks reading at 800×600 resolution.
We’ve added a calendar widget to make it easy to find the posts for a given date.
We have easier navigation from page to page, within search results, archives, categories and navigating from [...]

We’ve talked repeatedly about using ROI to drive prioritization of requirements based upon value. ROI can be used as the basis for prioritization for all decision making.

If we fail to take risk into account, our calculations will certainly be wrong, and we may make a poor decision. When we talk about accounting for risk in this context, we mean that we are accounting for the unlikely, undesired, or unintentional outcomes. We use the term expected value to refer to the risk adjusted approximation of the outcome. In financial circles, this is also called discounting.

The most common mistake people make when calculating ROI is failing to take into account the expected value of the return or the expected value of the cost of a project.