About a week ago I was offered help to translate logview4net to Russian. The offer came from a gentleman owning an open sourced project for translating .NET applications.
Of course I was thrilled by the offer. I had really thought about localizing it, but since English and Swedish is all I know I haven’t put it on top of my to do list. Most, if not all, Swedish users of logview4net are probably happy using it in English.
Jeffrey Palermo states in his post ‘Baking requirements - Developing with raw ingredients is waste’ that requirements has to be thought through before they are presented to the developers.
I think that is a statement that holds true for all levels of requirements. Software development is intangible and it is perceived that changes are easy to do. This leads to bad requirements from everyone. Customers doesn’t think through their needs and expectations before starting software projects.
Lots of times I have been involved in lengthy discussions about how to solve a problem and trying to guess what the user really wanted based on his initial request. It is not uncommon that implementing all of the possible solutions and lettings the user choose the one that satisfies his needs would have been done in a shorter amount of time than discussing it.
I’m probably rambling but if we have a continuous build, that is releasable, we could in many of these cases give the customer builds with all of the solutions and let the customer decide.
Share and store documents… Free.
When you do daily builds, a practice I think is essential for high quality software development, it is important to make sure the build is so complete and easy to find that the test team and sales force can choose what version, and when, to install by them selfs.
It is an accepted truth that the longer you wait to fix an error the more expensive it gets.
It is quite interesting to see how developers are affected by a projects perceived market value and internal company status.
When a new project is started people are usually open for new ideas and most of the involved does things to move the project forward. A direction that is not allways the same for an individual as the group, but at least it’s moving.
When the project has been going for a while and it hasn’t delivered as planned, decisions might be made to rewrite parts of the system, partly to show the market that it is able to adapt and partly to get the staff moving again.