Comments on: Measuring Project Completion Progress

By: Tom

Tom — Thu, 07 Dec 2006 20:07:14 +0000

I absolutely agree with this. The tricky part is making sure you don’t “uncomplete” some of you “done” features when you implement later ones.
Good automated regression testing is really important to make sure you are not going backwards.

By: Roger L. Cauvin

Roger L. Cauvin — Tue, 05 Dec 2006 18:17:10 +0000

Agilists embrace this philosophy in their emphasis on frequent “releases”. A key characteristic of a “release” is that it be demonstratable to an end user. To be demonstratable to end users, it must show how they would achieve something of value to them using the system. Internal architectural progress is of no value to a user. Features are.
However, sometimes the highest risk in a software project lies in the architecture. Developers should attack such risks first. A good agilist identifies creative ways of exercising and addressing these architectural risks while still delivering value to a user early and incrementally.

By: Joshua Foster

Joshua Foster — Tue, 05 Dec 2006 04:57:42 +0000

I think I know what you are talking about when you mean, you can be sure of measuring a project’s progress by feature. Can you clarify what you mean by architecture?
Joshua