Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 11:52:29 -0500
Reply-To: "Fehd, Ronald J" <RJF2@CDC.GOV>
Sender: "SAS(r) Discussion" <SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
From: "Fehd, Ronald J" <RJF2@CDC.GOV>
Subject: Re: Managing a Data Group Department
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> From: Of ben.powell
> And read the Mythical Man Month:
I'll second that emotion:
I used that as a reference in my Program Header paper.
Brooks, back in the 60s,
Design take 1/2 our time
which is 1/3 understand problem, research
and 1/6 coding
then we get to the other half:
Testing 1/2 our time
which is 1/4 component or unit test
1/4 systems or integration test
Users are responsible for two factoids:
requirements: what do we(they) think this is to be
purpose: this is what we(they) will use it for
We -- programmers, aka producers --
are responsible for:
specifications: how we think we will build it
thus: The Requirements Specifications Document:
what They want
and how We think we will build it.
and as Sig so poignantly pointed out:
first build it
then change it: Change Requests are done -after- acceptance.
"scope creep" ROFLMAO
as Satchel Paige said:
"Don't look back.
Something might be gaining on you."
Ron Fehd the macro maven CDC Atlanta GA USA RJF2 at cdc dot gov