From what I can tell, a lemma is somthing that is assumed to be true so we can move forward under a given premise.

From Jeff Sutherland:

Wegner’s lemma - an interactive system can never be fully specified nor can it ever be fully tested. This is the software analogy to Godel’s theorem.

And now I have to mention Godel’s theorem. A theorem is a bit stronger than a Lemma. It has been banged on my scientists and other smart people, accepted as true or at least, having merit.

What’s with the fear of commitment? I guess you cannot apply Scrum principles to mathematics or logic. I am a big fan of logic (Ayer, especially), and so I understand. What I dig about Ayer is his principle of nonsense. I am sure if my old Professors heard me call it that they would choke on their oatmeal, but Ayer says that any statement that cannot be proven true or false is nonsensical, and that every statement that can be proven true is a tautology. Makes good, tight, sense to me.

This is not wholly irrelevant to software engineering. Bear with me.

I am going to cop out a little here, because it give me a headache, but you can read about Godel’s theorem here. It has been extended into many different verticals, disciplines, and websites. It seems to be just short of a Law. If it interests you to understand it’s complexities, please pursue the aforementioned link. You will find many other links there.

Below, you can read about how all this applies to your approach at scoping a software System and creating a proposal.

Lots of clients want a firm proposal with a firm, fixed price. They probably have experience with manufacturing processes, and so the Waterfall approach makes sense to them. This understandable. Software Engineering (new development), however, is not manufactuing. Unless you are prepared to eat potentially copious personhours of labor or fall short of customer expectations, you need to build a little slack into your proposal. This is classically done by using a multiplier, or by pricing iterations. Always seemed a little sneaky to me. The line item “Slack” reads like a copout.

Wegner’s lemma speaka to the validity of an iterative process of discover, code, deliver; indeed, it was one of the arguments used to support and ititiate the pursuit of Scrum before Scrum had been proven. Scrum is not new, contrary to popular belief. I mentioned in a previous post that we had something very similar to scrum at my family’s construction business, but it has been a software process for over ten years. It is finally getting real traction. If it did not work, you would not still be hearing about it. That’s the good thing about theories, I guess; if a theory proves to be bologna, you stop hearing about it pretty quickly.

You have three ways to approach a software proposal, if not more:

Give transparency into your process, deliver frequently, and this is pallatable. “Tust me” rarely works in the absence of a bullet-poof reputation of long-standing relationship.

There are really two options: commit to a Contract or commit to a Contracted System. A contract is not flexible and does not benefit anyone when it asks them to commit to ambiguity. A System is much more robust.

Here, we invoke Wegner’s lemma and our experience building software. Again, the requirements wind up being the source code.

Of course, I think the best is a combination approach. Do some initial requirements so you are not playing code cowboy. Then, engage the client in an iterative approach, grounded in a proven iterative methodology (like Scrum or XP or MSF) and keep communication open. If your client is able to see progress, they will not see your function as a black box. And if you make them the Product Owner, allow them to prioitize features (user stories), they will not have to ask why they do not have feature X yet. They will have asked for features D and E and delayed feature X in a calculated decision.

PS: As an asid, I’d like to mention, I am not really digging this new version of WordPress under FireFox. It is slow as anything. Under Opera, it seems a lot better.

Update 061108

Craig Brown is one of my favorite readers. He always has interesting comments (or he did, when I allowed comments… and there are 2 reasons I don’t anymore) and I wind up reading his blog and learning something when he engages me. That’s right Craig, you engaged me.

I want to respond to Craig directly because he is a smart guy that I respect although for all I know he has a suit made of human skin. I am not suggesting that people start contracting a system as much as I am suggesting that part of the client engagement include education and that *our* discipline stops being so defensive and starts getting down and dirty with the critics. I want real metrics. I want a marketing machine. I want what is best for humankind. I am a very sweet guy.

I have not seen software engineering really face, head-on, the world of clients who expect the more traditional manufacturing model. In contracting a system, I am suggesting that clients understand what they are contracting (in an Agile model) and I do think it is any more similar to “time and materials” than hiring any specialist is. Take a large investment firm. Go to them as a small software company and ask they to just trust you because you will be giving them frequent updates.

My doctor gave me frequent updates during my colonoscopy.

I invoke Wegner’s lemma and neglect to get into it deliberately. I maintain that project management and indeed software engineering as a whole are less science than art. Sure, we have color theory, but when it comes down to it, either you got it or you don’t (ability). We need more talented, open-minded, caring people who want to produce to the best of their abilities and not just slap “PMP” on the resume because it gets you a 20 percent higher salary and financial institutions wont talk to you without it. This will change SOON. Mark my words. We are going to see a hybrid of hybrid models. We are going to become trailblazers instead of pencil pushers.

BTW - I am not a pencil pusher. No Sir-ee Bob.

This applies to PMs, BAs, and software engineering firms. I do not understand Wegner’s lemma, but it has been fodder for the Agile community and I would like to see that stop. We do not need more pseudo-science or forced analogies, any more *almost* universal techniques, excuses, or approaches. We need to be honest and upfront and tell it like it is.

I invoke something I do not find palatable because I have a degree in philosophy, and it taught me one thing; you can talk theory all day, but at the end of the day, it is mental masturbation (excuse me) until you can actualize, materialize, and deliver something tangible. Tangible may take the shape of an idea. It may be a widget. But still, Wegner’s lemma does not manifest directly. We should not point to it for excuses.

Instead, we should progressively elaborate (sorry PMI) as a community and make change. Agilists become frustrated when you ask them “When and how much?” and I think it is a shame. We can give answers. We just cannot commit to a specific figure unless we

- are prepared to lose money
- pad our estimates heavily
- have done it before and are just generally amazing
- define scope and really insult the customer when our scope doc, that we knew was incomplete, falls short of being complete

Thanks, Craig.

Josh

Is PMI or RUP or (name your PM buzzword) the right approach, always? Even under optimum conditions?

Needless to say, there are many who resist and resent the Federal Guidelines. What resulted was the “Let Judges be Judges” movement. It stipulates that a codified and pseudo-scientific sentencing approach does more harm than good; it eliminates the ability for special circumstances to be taken into account and for Judges to judge. This is over-simplifying a bit, because there are downward and upward departures, but the overall spirit of the Let Judges be Judges movement is that people are individuals and a crime is never committed twice - just like a project is never executed twice. Circumstances are dynamic and cannot be disregarded, deemed secondary to an overarching Guideline, or taken as less than the very essence of the situation.

In law, and in software, it is imperative that a blueprint is regarded as a guideline, not a mandate.

And so, with Agile Software Development, we have UML models that serve not to define the System, but to help us realize the System. The Agile Project Manager, once preoccupied with resources and tasks and WBS numbers and bars on Gantt Charts… becomes an advocate. They are not managing projects as much as they are acting as the catalyst for progress and the liaison for the client, the technical staff, and the stakeholders/product owner. They are the Quarterback, but they are also the Cheerleader. Yes, I am man enough to admit that.

This is a different kind of Manager. Soft skills are very important. Empirical data becomes more important that speculative data, and a PM must learn that although they might be the grease, there are no interchangeable parts to lubricate. One developer is not the same as another. The Mythical Man-Month is real. Finesse is as or more important than .mpp skills. It is hard to quantify these skills, but it can be done.

Under a more Agile roof, developers are given the freedom to make decisions about development. The artifacts that served as definitions now serve as visionary guidelines, and the people who existed to enforce methodologies (Procrustean, minus the torture) now enforce principles. Judges can be judges. Decisions are made by informed people within their domain of expertise.

While PMI and the like will speak of “continuous integration”, this is misleading (in my opinion) because it again assumes that a larger dictum is in fact, universally true. We all know that in complex software Systems, there is no final blueprint until the source code has been written. Software Engineering is not like Building Construction, and although the attempt to establish a toolkit that can accommodate any endeavor is admirable and would be helpful for sure, I submit that the toolkit itself assumes specific functions and constrains more than it assists. The Project Manager looks to their toolkit to manage projects. It is as simple as that. I have read more than a few posts by PMI or Rational PMs that vehemently deny the utility of an Agile approach. I can’t help but wonder if they are a bit worried that this Agile thing will continue to get traction and the PMP will not be the litmus test for HR anymore.

In Complex Adaptive Systems, the team organizes itself and adapts, often without outwardly discernible impetus or organization, in response to developments in the project or effort. Watch a flock of birds. A school of fish. The fans at a Yanni concert. These are large groups of individuals that move or act together without being told to and do so more effectively than if they had to follow a list of rules. Everyone breaks out a lighter and sways without being told to. If I have two and you dont have one, I give you one so you can be part of the magic of the Whole. The whole is important. The vision is important, and the Project Manager without her/his Gantt Chart may feel naked.

Software teams are Complex Adaptive Systems. The Project Manager serves to foster the product vision, remove obstacles, assist the individual team members, and play Captain Kirk, keeping the Prime Directive in mind at all times.

Let Developers be Developers. They know how to fix a problem with message queuing within a Host Integration Services project using WCF better than a PMP does. Why insert the PMP into the picture to break down into tasks and subtasks what the dev already knows and can be done with before the spec is written? Code, test, code, test, show, code, test, show, etc. Test-driven or feature-driven development will keep you safe.

Interestingly enough, and I will write more about this later, in science and the fascinating world of drug discovery, a test-driven approach to development is the norm. You could say it is the only way to do it. But I will get into this later. I need to quiz my wife (a PhD student in drug delivery systems) before I say too much.

It is very liberating to participate in an Agile development environment, and if you are lucky enough to have clients that are on board with the process, you can do amazing things. I am (partly) a Project Manager. I do not like Gantt Charts. I like CAS theory and Agile philosophy. If you have been reading my blog for any period of time, you will recognize that my beliefs are shifting. I maintain that requirements are valuable, and I still really dig UML (I can do Sequence Diagrams complete with 2.0 compliant pins that will knock your socks off, and Context Diagrams are just plain handy), but these are not artifacts forged from stone. They are not Olymipan.

Keep it Barely Good Enough, keep it useful, and allow talented people to do what they are talented at.

Viva Agilidad!

Okay, thats cheesy.

A good read.

Be well,

Josh

Regardless, if you have a PDA or BlackBerry, you need to check out BeeJive simply because it is the most intuitive, easiest to install, best IM client I have found for handheld devices. The people there are cool, too.

Consider this a plug. I had an 8703e and now sport an 8830. I was going to get the Curve now that Verizon carries it, but I picked one up and ewwww it felt like a toy. I like my solid 8830. I was it was solid chrome and heavier, but it’s cool. As much as I will never go overseas with it, or at least have no intentions on going overseas with it, I will keep it. Sure, the Curve has a qwerty with space between the keys, but could they make those keys any smaller? My big fat thumbs can’t handle something so precise.

Anyhow, BeeJive. JiveTalk Mobile Messenger. Get it. They have it for iphones and have a Windows Mobile version getting ready for prime time.

Best,
Josh

And today, someone IMs me and tells me about Trillian Astra.

Man, do things change quickly.

It looks sexy. It looks pretty cool. I don’t care about MySpace messages or emoticons, but it looks pretty slick from the screen shots and I like what I read about the functionality. I dont tend to install alphas, but I just might… this one time…

Take a peek: Trillian Astra

J

Anyhow, here, for your enjoyment, is the freebie PGP 6.5.8

There was some controversy as to whether or not this had a “back door” for G-MEN. I don’t believe it, but it might matter to you in principle. I only post this here because PGP is a very cool product and what Zimmerman did in regard to opening the code to the world (when the government decided that PGP was a threat) was brilliant. I dig the product. Or, I dug it. When it was free. When the philosophy was indicative of something new and well-intentioned.

Take care,

Josh

Oh yeah, thanks to everyone who wrote me and said they liked the new layout. I do too. I wish I could say I implemented it (sounds harder than ‘turned it on’) because of aesthetics. That was only part of the reason. My version of WordPress had a crazy security vulnerability that allowed some loser to insert tiny iframes into my blog (to poker sites) and I had to upgrade. It wasn’t too painful of a process, and I got a little more freedom with my design. So, thanks, and Google: you can re-index me now. Please. Like, soon. You just send me an invite to your App Engine. You know that I am a good guy with a nice, safe site. The emails below show that I was approved for the app engine while being declined for content indexing. What does this mean?

I know what it means. Evil Empire!

J

I run Digsby (am a Trillian convert) and so I get to have people on my IM list from a wide number of IM services. I have AOL people, Yahoo people, a couple wacky Jabber people; I have about 60 people on my list, in total.

Almost 75 percent of these folks use GTalk.

That surpirses me, now that I am noticing it.

BTW - this site is now the latest and greatest version of Wordpress (to prevent the goofy hacker who has been pestering me from exploiting a hole in the previous version - yeah, GOOFY). Because it is the latest and greatest, please let me know if you see anything break. I know some links on my front page have broken, and I swear I will fix them soon, but so far nothing on the blog seems to have broken.

Have a good week. I don’t think I will have time to eat until Wednesday - but I should survive. Lots of stored energy expressly for that purpose.

J

I know a little bit about computers, “web 2.0″ sites, and social networking online. I really doubt that I invited a guy that I cannot stand the sight of to be my connection on Plaxo. I know I didnt. Besides attempting to connect me to the aforementioned jerk, Plaxo apparently sent requests to recruiters, scammers, and other folks that I hope to never hear from again but happen to have exchanged emails with me since I opened my gmail account a few years ago.

Bad, bad practice. I know users = $ to these sites, but there is a user and there is a User. Big difference.

And now, with me, there is an ex-user. If you want to delete you Plaxo account, this link should remove your Plaxo account for you.

We’ll see.

Someone remind me to not try every Beta that exists?

Best,

Josh

I believe in Requirements. I believe in them enough to capitalize the word as though they were divine. I believe in thoughful requirements. I believe in up front requirements. I believe that sometimes you do not capitalize requirements and they are only as good as they are valuable to the particular project.

I also really dig Agile methodology. I dig it enough to capitalize it too - although I suspect it may need to be capitalized anyhow. People own it, or something.

So my conflict was short-lived, but intense: how can I strive for Agility while maintaining that Requirements are, in fact, required?

Agile does not say that Requirements should stay home with the year-long GANTT charts. This is where people can get a little testy, and PMs start clutching MS Project to their chests and getting nervous. No client I have ever worked at will sign a blank check. They all want to know what you are going to build, how much it is going to cost, etc. Obviously, internal project are a bit different. The company I was at before the company I am at now bled money for years on internal projects without ever delivering a clickable link. Was amazing. You really do need deliverables, and therefore requirements, but maybe you dont need 1000 lines of dot notated “The System shall…” declaratives that are the DNA of a project. Maybe scope creep isn’t creep, but evolution. We are not building prefab houses, here. This is software.

You need Barely Good Enough Requirements. See my entry on Barely Good Enough Use Cases for a nice parallel. Clients are different. Some will want BUF (big up front) Requirements and to nail down - HAMMER DOWN - the scope. They will be pleased with the idea of Change Requests and Scope Control. This makes intuitive sense to a lot of business people because software is not overtly that much different from anything else (but we know that it is, don’t we?) and should be able to be priced and described before delivery.

So your Barely Good Enough Requirements will serve to give you an estimate and a rough scope - as rough as you decide is Barely Good Enough. And then you scrum away, allocate from your backlog, and change direction when required like a UFO doing right angle turns in the Arizona sky. I mean, besides the fact that you are probably not an alien. And you aren’t likely to tolerate that kind of pitch without losing your lunch, although I’ve seen a PM lose their lunch over an abrupt change in project direction. It was not pretty.

I like the idea of a Requirements Document that is one giant Context Diagram. I like the idea of it splitting, like a cell, into separate organisms that comprise a larger System. I like organic development and organic growth.

More on this later. I am annoyed with Google and do not feel like writing. It is distracting me.

Take care,

Josh

I attribute this to the Digsby Widget. That’s all I can think of. There is no malware on this site.

Cripes.

Now the process is sisyphean. I have to ask to be reconsidered by a human when it was undoubtedly a machine that considered me MALWARE-infected in the first place.

And I know that this will not be easy. But you know, I will get to see how difficult it really is to come back from a Google bashing.

Thank Goodness I have a full-time job and some contracts on the side. If I depended on this site for a living, I would be in sad shape.

So let’s see how to get my ranking back. I will let you know what Google says. I have officially requested RECONSIDERATION against my MALWARE.

Google is Evil. Watch out for them…

Josh

UPDATE:

Ah, it was legit (semi) after all. I fell victim to a WordPress exploit (wp-stat) and there was a 1 pixel by 1 pixel iframe in some of my pages that was, indeed, evil.

I didn’t put it there. Bad guys did. The good folks at stopmalware.org emailed me and explained to me what was going on. Instead of the generic “you have evil source and are banned until you come back from the dark side” message, I got actualy code snippets that I just would not have found otherwise. Thats a problem with CMS systems - there is so much code. Cheers to you folks at StopMalWare. I wiped the iframe away, uninstalled the guilty module, and will rely on my ISP’s Webtrends reporting for my stats from now on. Webtrends is cool anyhow.

Now I will get cleared by StopMalWare and eventually, Google. I hope. Will keep you posted. It will be interesting to see how long it actually takes. Don’t you think? I’m very excited about it.

Moral: stay current on your software security updates!

Moral 2: Fantastico is fantastic, but there is something to be said for doing it yourself.

UPDATE TWO:

04.22.08 (4 days after blacklisting)

I just got notice that I am off of the blacklist. So much for it being an impossible task. Text follows:

We have received and processed your request for review of your website, mittechnical.com/. Google’s most recent test of your website found no badware behaviors on the site. As such, the Google warning page for your site has either already been removed or should be removed shortly. In addition, if your site has been listed in our Badware Website Clearinghouse, we will remove your site from the Clearinghouse list.

Overall moral: Communication is Key! Thanks to the folks at stopbadware.org

Did they do it just to try and steal the momentum of .NET?

Surely we are not to believe that Google is in business to be beneficent purveyors of independence.

Coming soon: a million applications with AdWords. A totally skewed and manipulated (bought and paid for) Search Engine System / Office Suite / Advertising Engine / Time Tracker and Invoicer.

And you thought pop-up windows were annoying… wait until your stock portfolio management software starts recommending Viagra to you.

Avoid this! First they want all the dark fiber and now they want your applications. It sounds like a conspiracy to me, but I am very wary of freebies that preclude innovation and simultaneously leverage business interest over innovation itself.

Think Service Oriented Architecture, the MIT/GNU license, Open Source, Semantic Web… but please don’t build your apps on Google. It would be a mistake, and not in the best interest of humankind.

Yikes.

J