Home > Archive > Software Engineering > May 2006 > When are we doing XP?
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
When are we doing XP?
|
|
| bill turner 2006-03-14, 9:57 pm |
| I am not trolling here, just trying to get some honest input. My
knowledge of XP is outdated. When I first got into and tried to
implement, there were twelve practices. These were:
1. The Planning Process.
2. Small Releases.
3. Metaphor.
4. Simple Design.
5. Testing.
6. Refactoring.
7. Pair Programming.
8. Collective Ownership.
9. Continuous Integration.
10. 40-hour W .
11. On-site Customer.
12. Coding Standard.
First, which of the above must be practiced in order to be considered
"doing XP"? Conversely, which can be not practiced? My concern here is
that old Jerry Weinberg analogy of removing the sesame seeds from the
bun.
Second, if all must be practiced, in what order should they be
introduced? Certainly introducing all the practices at once would be
too much to chew.
Thanks for the input!
Bill
------------------------------------------
Bill Turner
A faith that the free play of market forces will eventually end in Good is, in fact, more 'absurd' than religious belief, for there, at least, there is a presumption of an intelligent Agent Who writes straight with His crooked lines. - William Pfaff
Views expressed are entirely my own and only coincidentally represent those of other persons or entities.
| |
|
| [X-post to XP newsgroup...]
bill turner wrote:
> I am not trolling here, just trying to get some honest input. My
> knowledge of XP is outdated. When I first got into and tried to
> implement, there were twelve practices. These were:
> 1. The Planning Process.
> 2. Small Releases.
> 3. Metaphor.
> 4. Simple Design.
> 5. Testing.
> 6. Refactoring.
> 7. Pair Programming.
> 8. Collective Ownership.
> 9. Continuous Integration.
> 10. 40-hour W.
> 11. On-site Customer.
> 12. Coding Standard.
>
> First, which of the above must be practiced in order to be considered
> "doing XP"? Conversely, which can be not practiced? My concern here is
> that old Jerry Weinberg analogy of removing the sesame seeds from the
> bun.
What's the value of calling what you do XP? Complete answer below.
Another item there is "Sitting Together". That means programmers work in a
common workspace with pair-stations.
> Second, if all must be practiced, in what order should they be
> introduced? Certainly introducing all the practices at once would be
> too much to chew.
Pro coaches like to throw a team into all of them at the same time. This
trades acute dependency on the coach for chronic stability.
If you want to adopt incrementally, recognize there are two cycles to
software development. The inner cycle is creating new features, and the
outer cycle is releasing software and collecting new feature requests.
So start at the inner cycle with Test Driven Development. Write no line of
code without a failing unit test. And adopt Frequent Releases (via
Continuous Builds) for the outer cycle.
The value of XP is the practices fit together and support each other, as you
remove the competing practices (such as Big Requirements Up Front). So the
immersion technique safely replaces traditional supports with XP supports,
and the incremental adoption technique retains the traditional supports.
--
Phlip
[url]http://www.greencheese.org/ZLand[/url] <-- NOT a blog!!!
| |
| Ron Jeffries 2006-03-15, 9:57 pm |
| On Wed, 15 Mar 2006 03:18:29 GMT, bill turner <username@mn.rr.com> wrote:
>I am not trolling here, just trying to get some honest input. My
>knowledge of XP is outdated. When I first got into and tried to
>implement, there were twelve practices. These were:
>1. The Planning Process.
>2. Small Releases.
>3. Metaphor.
>4. Simple Design.
>5. Testing.
>6. Refactoring.
>7. Pair Programming.
>8. Collective Ownership.
>9. Continuous Integration.
>10. 40-hour W.
>11. On-site Customer.
>12. Coding Standard.
>
>First, which of the above must be practiced in order to be considered
>"doing XP"? Conversely, which can be not practiced? My concern here is
>that old Jerry Weinberg analogy of removing the sesame seeds from the
>bun.
As perhaps the most voluble if not valuable proponent of XP, I think this is not
a very useful question. The important issue isn't whether one is "doing XP", but
whether one is improving one's software process.
Back in 2000, I wrote an article called "Are We Doing XP?", which you can find
at http://www.xprogramming.com/xpmag/are_we_doing_xp.htm .
I still pretty much support what I said there, though I would doubtless phrase
some of the ideas differently. But the point of the article is that the best
thing is to consider what the practices provide, and decide based on that what
to do.
>
>Second, if all must be practiced, in what order should they be
>introduced? Certainly introducing all the practices at once would be
>too much to chew.
Not necessarily, though a team will probalby not manage to do them all well
right away. What to do first depends on a team's own needs. Very common needs
seem to include testing, working in short iterations, and working together.
The yahoo group "extremeprogramming" would be a good place to talk about this,
as would comp.software.extreme-programming. The yahoo group is more active than
the newsgroup.
Regards,
--
Ron Jeffries
www.XProgramming.com
I'm giving the best advice I have. You get to decide if it's true for you.
| |
| bill turner 2006-03-16, 7:56 am |
| On Wed, 15 Mar 2006 19:53:00 -0500, Ron Jeffries <ronjeffries@acm.org>
wrote:
>On Wed, 15 Mar 2006 03:18:29 GMT, bill turner <username@mn.rr.com> wrote:
>
>
>As perhaps the most voluble if not valuable proponent of XP, I think this is not
>a very useful question. The important issue isn't whether one is "doing XP", but
>whether one is improving one's software process.
>
>Back in 2000, I wrote an article called "Are We Doing XP?", which you can find
>at http://www.xprogramming.com/xpmag/are_we_doing_xp.htm .
>
>I still pretty much support what I said there, though I would doubtless phrase
>some of the ideas differently. But the point of the article is that the best
>thing is to consider what the practices provide, and decide based on that what
>to do.
>
>Not necessarily, though a team will probalby not manage to do them all well
>right away. What to do first depends on a team's own needs. Very common needs
>seem to include testing, working in short iterations, and working together.
>
>The yahoo group "extremeprogramming" would be a good place to talk about this,
>as would comp.software.extreme-programming. The yahoo group is more active than
>the newsgroup.
>
>Regards,
Thanks to both you and Phlip for answering the question. The one
reason I do feel it is important to know if we are "doing XP" is that
if it doesn't pan out and I bring my concerns to this, or the other
locations you mentioned, one of the things that will be claimed is
that the process didn't fail, that we failed by not doing everything.
Hopefully this will be a moot point.
The big reason I wanted to know what to implement first is that
management is always anxious to see results. So, I was hoping to find
out what would provide either the most bang for the buck, or what
would be the easiest things to implement (to show progress).
Also, there are no current plans to go XP, but I did want to talk
about how to introduce it intelligently.
Thanks again!
------------------------------------------
Bill Turner
A faith that the free play of market forces will eventually end in Good is, in fact, more 'absurd' than religious belief, for there, at least, there is a presumption of an intelligent Agent Who writes straight with His crooked lines. - William Pfaff
Views expressed are entirely my own and only coincidentally represent those of other persons or entities.
| |
|
| bill turner wrote:
> The one
> reason I do feel it is important to know if we are "doing XP" is that
> if it doesn't pan out and I bring my concerns to this, or the other
> locations you mentioned, one of the things that will be claimed is
> that the process didn't fail, that we failed by not doing everything.
> Hopefully this will be a moot point.
We expect the process to work at all times, and any perturbation gets
noticed. If you can't build-and-test everything in one batch, if you can't
continuously integrate, if bugs are escaping the bench, you will notice
these things early and often.
So don't blame the messenger. Do ask "why" 5 times.
> The big reason I wanted to know what to implement first is that
> management is always anxious to see results. So, I was hoping to find
> out what would provide either the most bang for the buck, or what
> would be the easiest things to implement (to show progress).
I have heard anecdotes that XP-style processes deluged managers with
details, and kept them very busy tracking, ranking, and testing.
> Also, there are no current plans to go XP, but I did want to talk
> about how to introduce it intelligently.
Getting permission is not strictly required. Just start TDD, continuous
builds, and frequent releases.
| |
| JXStern 2006-03-16, 6:58 pm |
| On Wed, 15 Mar 2006 03:18:29 GMT, bill turner <username@mn.rr.com>
wrote:
>I am not trolling here, just trying to get some honest input. My
>knowledge of XP is outdated. When I first got into and tried to
>implement, there were twelve practices. These were:
>1. The Planning Process.
>2. Small Releases.
>3. Metaphor.
>4. Simple Design.
>5. Testing.
>6. Refactoring.
>7. Pair Programming.
>8. Collective Ownership.
>9. Continuous Integration.
>10. 40-hour W.
>11. On-site Customer.
>12. Coding Standard.
You've got your official (non-)answers, I suggest the real question
is:
Which of these are "extreme" and which are generic iterative?
Your concerns are valid, but, well, I guess I'd have to agree to some
extent with the official answers, you've got to "just do it" at some
point.
Which is, perhaps, the real nut of XP in any case!
J.
| |
|
| JXStern wrote:
> You've got your official (non-)answers...
> Your concerns are valid, but, well, I guess I'd have to agree to some
> extent with the official answers, you've got to "just do it" at some
> point...
Here's the Ghandi scale of process adoption:
1 first they ignore you
2 then they laugh at you
3 then they fight you
4 then you win
It appears JXStern can't bear to break with his grumpy history and
acknowledge 4 without firmly declaring 3 first. ;-)
--
Phlip
[url]http://www.greencheese.org/ZLand[/url] <-- NOT a blog!!!
| |
| JXStern 2006-03-16, 6:58 pm |
| On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 21:48:16 GMT, Phlip <phlip2005@gmail.com> wrote:
>Here's the Ghandi scale of process adoption:
>
> 1 first they ignore you
> 2 then they laugh at you
> 3 then they fight you
> 4 then you win
>
>It appears JXStern can't bear to break with his grumpy history and
>acknowledge 4 without firmly declaring 3 first. ;-)
You want dueling cliches:
* You lose the war and declare victory anyway.
The moment (which came in the first book) that Extreme Programming
stopped being extreme, it was simply laying claim to existing agile
(nee iterative) stuff, about as valid as a rooster taking credit for
making the sun rise.
To strain the metaphor, if XP wakes you up in the morning, fine, but
that's about the size of it.
J.
| |
| Ron Jeffries 2006-03-18, 3:56 am |
| On Fri, 17 Mar 2006 00:14:51 GMT, JXStern <JXSternChangeX2R@gte.net> wrote:
>
>The moment (which came in the first book) that Extreme Programming
>stopped being extreme, it was simply laying claim to existing agile
>(nee iterative) stuff, about as valid as a rooster taking credit for
>making the sun rise.
>
>To strain the metaphor, if XP wakes you up in the morning, fine, but
>that's about the size of it.
The point of Extreme Programming wasn't to merit the word "Extreme", but to set
forth a combined small set of practices that seemed to the various proponents to
be helpful and lead to success. No XP author from Beck on has claimed that the
material was new. The point was rather the reverse: here are things we've seen
done, which in concert, make up what we think is a good approach to doing
things.
Since that book came out almost ten years ago, I've spent my working time
visiting teams who are trying to improve. Most of them are not doing all the XP
practices, and would benefit from doing so. So whether XP makes the sun rise or
not, the advice is still good and still "news" to a large number of teams, if by
news we mean "stuff we aren't doing".
--
Ron Jeffries
www.XProgramming.com
I'm giving the best advice I have. You get to decide if it's true for you.
| |
| bill turner 2006-03-18, 9:57 pm |
| On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 04:32:12 GMT, "Phlip" <phlipcpp@yahoo.com> wrote:
>bill turner wrote:
>
>
>We expect the process to work at all times, and any perturbation gets
>noticed. If you can't build-and-test everything in one batch, if you can't
>continuously integrate, if bugs are escaping the bench, you will notice
>these things early and often.
>
>So don't blame the messenger. Do ask "why" 5 times.
>
>
>I have heard anecdotes that XP-style processes deluged managers with
>details, and kept them very busy tracking, ranking, and testing.
>
>
>Getting permission is not strictly required. Just start TDD, continuous
>builds, and frequent releases.
>
I don't know what type of organizations you work in, but most I know
require permission to deviate from the norm. Yes, I can probably get
away with writing tests first, but even that is not necessarily so. If
I need to get tools downloaded and installed, then there are hoops and
management wants to know what I am doing. Also, even with the tests,
if they notice a large number of tests, they could easily ask why I am
"wasting my time and not writing productive code".
What I am looking for is an implementation path. All I seem to be
hearing is "then a miracle occurs".
The "big bang" approach of adopting all practices at once hardly seems
realistic unless a major commitment has been made by the company
training and/or coaching/mentoring. Certainly others have thought
about this. If we could adopt it incrementally, say one practice per
month, that would allow staff to become far more familiar with each
practice before moving on to the next. Yes, some are probably coupled,
and those could be handled together.
Maybe we are talking apples and oranges here. Maybe my assumptions are
all wrong. My thinking is to integrate these practices into all
developers toolboxes, not have one four man team working on an
inconsequential project try them out. The latter could likely handle a
"big bang", and the consequences caused by confusion, etc., would be
minor because of the scope of the project & team size. Whereas if
rolling out to all developers in a larger shop, some would be working
on mission critical apps (in fact, they all seem to be mission
critical nowadays, nothing inconsequential). And, the resultant
confusion in a complete change in practice could bring the whole shop
to its knees for some time. I know, you'll likely immediately claim
this won't happen. However, to management, this is the risk, a risk
that can be mitigated through incremental adoption.
Funny how XP talks of doing things in small increments, but when it
comes to adoption, I hear "all or nothing". Nothing incremental about
that!
What I am asking does not seem unreasonable. I would ask the same type
of questions if implementing TSP/PSP practices, or whatever.
Bill
------------------------------------------
Bill Turner
A faith that the free play of market forces will eventually end in Good is, in fact, more 'absurd' than religious belief, for there, at least, there is a presumption of an intelligent Agent Who writes straight with His crooked lines. - William Pfaff
Views expressed are entirely my own and only coincidentally represent those of other persons or entities.
| |
|
| Ron Jeffries wrote:
> Since that book came out almost ten years ago, I've spent my working time
> visiting teams who are trying to improve. Most of them are not doing all
> the XP
> practices, and would benefit from doing so. So whether XP makes the sun
> rise or
> not, the advice is still good and still "news" to a large number of teams,
> if by
> news we mean "stuff we aren't doing".
What was original about the book, and uniquely credited to its authors and
their inspiration, was the /way/ it talked about software process. It used
simple and clear narratives to emphasize to things a healthy team does most.
Other books in the field of software process often obfuscate when the author
cleverly refuse to be caught taking a stand. They don't just say "do it like
this".
--
Phlip
[url]http://www.greencheese.org/ZLand[/url] <-- NOT a blog!!!
| |
|
| bill turner wrote:
> I don't know what type of organizations you work in, but most I know
> require permission to deviate from the norm. Yes, I can probably get
> away with writing tests first, but even that is not necessarily so. If
> I need to get tools downloaded and installed, then there are hoops and
> management wants to know what I am doing. Also, even with the tests,
> if they notice a large number of tests, they could easily ask why I am
> "wasting my time and not writing productive code".
Woah! None of that certainly has ever happened to me!!
> What I am looking for is an implementation path. All I seem to be
> hearing is "then a miracle occurs".
Again: Either start by TDD and frequent releases, or hire a miracle worker.
If you must start even earlier, then start with a continuous build server.
> The "big bang" approach of adopting all practices at once hardly seems
> realistic unless a major commitment has been made by the company
> training and/or coaching/mentoring. Certainly others have thought
> about this.
That's why the best process coaches are the ones capable of mentoring (and
wheedling and cajoling) your bosses. Folks without that "leadership aura"
need not apply.
> If we could adopt it incrementally, say one practice per
> month, that would allow staff to become far more familiar with each
> practice before moving on to the next. Yes, some are probably coupled,
> and those could be handled together.
The part that risks miracles is where the pressure of TDD and Frequent
Releases tunes up your process just enough that you reach the next level.
The bug rate is going down, and time to market are going down. Then stop;
why bother implementing by-the-book XP?
> Maybe we are talking apples and oranges here. Maybe my assumptions are
> all wrong. My thinking is to integrate these practices into all
> developers toolboxes, not have one four man team working on an
> inconsequential project try them out. The latter could likely handle a
> "big bang", and the consequences caused by confusion, etc., would be
> minor because of the scope of the project & team size. Whereas if
> rolling out to all developers in a larger shop, some would be working
> on mission critical apps (in fact, they all seem to be mission
> critical nowadays, nothing inconsequential). And, the resultant
> confusion in a complete change in practice could bring the whole shop
> to its knees for some time. I know, you'll likely immediately claim
> this won't happen. However, to management, this is the risk, a risk
> that can be mitigated through incremental adoption.
It could easily happen. It's what the professional coaches spot and correct
early. Yet you might indeed accidentally fall into BigAgileUpFront, or you
might threaten the career of someone whose job was to cause roadblocks, or
threaten the ratings of those whose job was to find and count bugs, or
attract the attention of a rival executive who wants to make yours look bad,
or your pair programmers could become monogamous and waste the time they
expected to save, or retrofitting unit tests could expose your code's low
quality, or you could have corporate rules against refactoring a database
"owned" by a DBA who does not report to your team, or your project might
depend on a project run by a team who refuses to become Agile, and who
causes any of these points to show your bosses why Agile sucks.
> Funny how XP talks of doing things in small increments, but when it
> comes to adoption, I hear "all or nothing". Nothing incremental about
> that!
From my first post I said the two general techniques were incrementally, or
professional immersion.
You could also start a reading group at work. At a certain time a small crew
meets to discuss books they read. Any books. ;-)
--
Phlip
[url]http://www.greencheese.org/ZLand[/url] <-- NOT a blog!!!
| |
| David Lightstone 2006-03-18, 9:57 pm |
|
"Phlip" <phlipcpp@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:_4WSf.20708$NS6.10653@newssvr30.news.prodigy.com...
> Ron Jeffries wrote:
>
>
> What was original about the book, and uniquely credited to its authors and
> their inspiration, was the /way/ it talked about software process. It used
> simple and clear narratives to emphasize to things a healthy team does
> most. Other books in the field of software process often obfuscate when
> the author cleverly refuse to be caught taking a stand. They don't just
> say "do it like this".
Outstanding testamonial, but highly biased
They probably refuse to say "" do it like this "", because they don't
realized that one size does indeed fit all. The is what you are attempting
to imply, isn't it?
>
> --
> Phlip
> [url]http://www.greencheese.org/ZLand[/url] <-- NOT a blog!!!
>
>
| |
| Ron Jeffries 2006-03-19, 3:56 am |
| On Sat, 18 Mar 2006 15:51:24 GMT, bill turner <username@mn.rr.com> wrote:
>Funny how XP talks of doing things in small increments, but when it
>comes to adoption, I hear "all or nothing". Nothing incremental about
>that!
Maybe you hear all or nothing, but that's not what people are saying.
--
Ron Jeffries
www.XProgramming.com
I'm giving the best advice I have. You get to decide if it's true for you.
| |
| Ron Jeffries 2006-03-19, 3:56 am |
| On Sat, 18 Mar 2006 17:22:53 GMT, "David Lightstone"
<david._NoSpamlightstone@prodigy.net> wrote:
>They probably refuse to say "" do it like this "", because they don't
>realized that one size does indeed fit all. The is what you are attempting
>to imply, isn't it?
One size does not fit all. However, working together always has advantages;
testing is generally a good idea; planning and executing in small increments
with rapid feedback tends always to keep one on course; and so on.
If one wanted sincerely to assess what Agile is, how it works, whether it was
applicable to one's own life, one might explore the details.
I've been doing software for nearly a half-century, and Agile for a decade. It
appears to me that the principles behind the Agile methods apply nearly
everywhere, and that the practices are nearly always useful. I only include the
word "nearly" on the off chance that somewhere there is a situation so
pathological that the practices don't apply well. A team that codes by carving
characters into stone tablets might find refactoring a problem, stuff like that.
Every team does Agile differently. Yet there is important and valuable
similarity to what they all do and how they do it. One size does not fit all,
and details vary, but the ideas have value over a very wide range.
--
Ron Jeffries
www.XProgramming.com
I'm giving the best advice I have. You get to decide if it's true for you.
| |
| David Lightstone 2006-03-19, 6:57 pm |
|
"Ron Jeffries" <ronjeffries@acm.org> wrote in message
news:4l8q12ddbpi4eor6bjfj6035bvk6npu9ua@
4ax.com...
> On Sat, 18 Mar 2006 15:51:24 GMT, bill turner <username@mn.rr.com> wrote:
>
>
> Maybe you hear all or nothing, but that's not what people are saying.
>
Really, which features of XP can "incrementally" be adopted?
(no doubt the question has been raised before)
(no doubt the previous answer will be attempted again)
> --
> Ron Jeffries
> www.XProgramming.com
> I'm giving the best advice I have. You get to decide if it's true for you.
| |
| David Lightstone 2006-03-19, 6:57 pm |
|
"Ron Jeffries" <ronjeffries@acm.org> wrote in message
news:po8q12phm8vfm9jf2leo5illmujkctvvts@
4ax.com...
> On Sat, 18 Mar 2006 17:22:53 GMT, "David Lightstone"
> <david._NoSpamlightstone@prodigy.net> wrote:
>
>
> One size does not fit all.
Lets try avoiding out of context replys Ron
Did I misinterprete Phlip somehow? I don't think I did, but apparently you
do
>However, working together always has advantages;
> testing is generally a good idea; planning and executing in small
> increments
> with rapid feedback tends always to keep one on course; and so on.
Yes, yes I have heard the mantra before.
>
> If one wanted sincerely to assess what Agile is, how it works, whether it
> was
> applicable to one's own life, one might explore the details.
Funny one could also say the same thing about the traditional Agile strawman
Big Up Front Design (BUFD)
>
> I've been doing software for nearly a half-century, and Agile for a
> decade.
2006 - 45 = 1961 That would be pre IBM 7090 era, IBM 1401 perhaps. So what.
Lots of prople who read this newsgroup are old enough to be familiar with
those machines
>It
> appears to me that the principles behind the Agile methods apply nearly
> everywhere, and that the practices are nearly always useful. I only
> include the
> word "nearly" on the off chance that somewhere there is a situation so
> pathological that the practices don't apply well.
My how you forget. Rather than going round and round, I would say that if
you can't eliminate the hedge words, then you really don't have enought
experience yet to be able to understand when the Agile like approaches are
inapplicable. That is to truly understand, you must know the limitations.
Hedge implies ignorance of limitations or a willingness to gloss over
unsettling things. My money is on gloss
> A team that codes by carving
> characters into stone tablets might find refactoring a problem, stuff like
> that.
I have no idea what you mean by "stuff like that" it is delibarately
ambiguous. I suspect that carving in stone is just another of the many
strawman used by those you s to advocate use of "Agile" like methods
>
> Every team does Agile differently. Yet there is important and valuable
> similarity to what they all do and how they do it. One size does not fit
> all,
> and details vary, but the ideas have value over a very wide range.
Something that everyone does differently is just a catch all for the absense
of anything in common (the empty set). I would simply suggest that the vague
statement "... important and valuable similarity to what they all do and how
they do it." implies that there is an incremental means of adopting XP
(assuming you are foolishly forced to do so). Now if only someone could
articulate that (the empty set is also common to the similarity).
I will bet that not one of the "practices" will be exclude from the
increment. Heck you probably will have to add some
>
> --
> Ron Jeffries
> www.XProgramming.com
> I'm giving the best advice I have. You get to decide if it's true for you.
| |
|
| Ron Jeffries wrote:
>
> One size does not fit all.
Ah, but the "one argument fits all" technique always works to bait Ron! ;-)
--
Phlip
[url]http://www.greencheese.org/ZLand[/url] <-- NOT a blog!!!
| |
| Ron Jeffries 2006-03-19, 9:56 pm |
| On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 14:07:57 GMT, "David Lightstone"
<david._NoSpamlightstone@prodigy.net> wrote:
>Really, which features of XP can "incrementally" be adopted?
>
>(no doubt the question has been raised before)
>(no doubt the previous answer will be attempted again)
I can tell you're listening avidly.
The following are quite safe and useful to adopt separately:
Whole Team -- working physically together. Include "customers" if possible;
Planning Game
Small Releases
Customer Acceptance Tests
Pair Programming
Test-Driven Development
Coding Standard
Metaphor
Continuous Integration
Sustainable Pace
I would suggest caution with incrementally doing these without testing:
Simple Design
Team Code Ownership
Refactoring
Regards,
--
Ron Jeffries
www.XProgramming.com
I'm giving the best advice I have. You get to decide if it's true for you.
| |
| Ron Jeffries 2006-03-19, 9:56 pm |
| On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 14:40:18 GMT, "David Lightstone"
<david._NoSpamlightstone@prodigy.net> wrote:
>Yes, yes I have heard the mantra before.
No, David, it is very clear that you haven't really heard it, even once.
--
Ron Jeffries
www.XProgramming.com
I'm giving the best advice I have. You get to decide if it's true for you.
| |
|
| Ron Jeffries wrote:
> I would suggest caution with incrementally doing these without testing:
> Simple Design
> Team Code Ownership
> Refactoring
Gee - those are the ones the whiners keep whining about!
--
Phlip
[url]http://www.greencheese.org/ZLand[/url] <-- NOT a blog!!!
| |
| David Lightstone 2006-03-20, 7:57 am |
|
"Ron Jeffries" <ronjeffries@acm.org> wrote in message
news:vf0s12hhtod7a7t78rob9crfftcd4r2ag3@
4ax.com...
> On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 14:40:18 GMT, "David Lightstone"
> <david._NoSpamlightstone@prodigy.net> wrote:
>
>
> No, David, it is very clear that you haven't really heard it, even once.
>
Nice retort. Which of the many mantras is being referenced here
> --
> Ron Jeffries
> www.XProgramming.com
> I'm giving the best advice I have. You get to decide if it's true for you.
| |
| bill turner 2006-03-20, 9:56 pm |
| On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 17:13:55 -0800, Ron Jeffries <ronjeffries@acm.org>
wrote:
>On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 14:07:57 GMT, "David Lightstone"
><david._NoSpamlightstone@prodigy.net> wrote:
>
>
>I can tell you're listening avidly.
>
>The following are quite safe and useful to adopt separately:
>
>Whole Team -- working physically together. Include "customers" if possible;
>Planning Game
>Small Releases
>Customer Acceptance Tests
>Pair Programming
>Test-Driven Development
>Coding Standard
>Metaphor
>Continuous Integration
>Sustainable Pace
>
Okay. Is there a sequence to these? I presume coding standard and TDD
would have to be very near the top because they seem the simplest,
easiest to understand and to implement. Phlip stated continuous
integration in another post. Would those be the top three? Does the
order of implementation depend upon culture? Some other factors? Sorry
that I haven't had the time to go read your paper. Is this stuff
covered in that?
What next?
>I would suggest caution with incrementally doing these without testing:
>Simple Design
>Team Code Ownership
>Refactoring
>
>Regards,
------------------------------------------
Bill Turner
A faith that the free play of market forces will eventually end in Good is, in fact, more 'absurd' than religious belief, for there, at least, there is a presumption of an intelligent Agent Who writes straight with His crooked lines. - William Pfaff
Views expressed are entirely my own and only coincidentally represent those of other persons or entities.
| |
| bill turner 2006-03-21, 3:56 am |
| On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 04:22:19 -0500, Ron Jeffries <ronjeffries@acm.org>
wrote:
>On Sat, 18 Mar 2006 15:51:24 GMT, bill turner <username@mn.rr.com> wrote:
>
>
>Maybe you hear all or nothing, but that's not what people are saying.
Your are probably right, though I did glom onto something Phlip said
in response to my OP:
>Pro coaches like to throw a team into all of them at the same time.
And then there was the following from my OP with your reply:
>
>Not necessarily, though a team will probalby not manage to do them all well
>right away.
Surely, you can see why "all or nothing" resonated so loudly.
------------------------------------------
Bill Turner
A faith that the free play of market forces will eventually end in
Good is, in fact, more 'absurd' than religious belief, for there, at
least, there is a presumption of an intelligent Agent Who writes
straight with His crooked lines. - William Pfaff
Views expressed are entirely my own and only coincidentally represent
those of other persons or entities.
| |
|
| bill turner wrote:
> Okay. Is there a sequence to these?
Ron might have quoted a little of /Extreme Programming Explained: Embrace
Change 2nd Edition/. It lists the practices that are safe in isolation.
The point is any one of those are safe to fully embrace, first, alone. TDD
is safe to do, and safe to do 100%, without ever writing a line of code
without a failing test. Metaphor is safe because it's just a pretty picture.
Sustainable Pace is safer than sleep deprivation. Etc.
> I presume coding standard and TDD
> would have to be very near the top because they seem the simplest,
> easiest to understand and to implement. Phlip stated continuous
> integration in another post. Would those be the top three? Does the
> order of implementation depend upon culture? Some other factors? Sorry
> that I haven't had the time to go read your paper. Is this stuff
> covered in that?
I thought I stated continuous builds. That's because some teams don't do
this and don't know they should:
Get a version controller. Write a batch that checks out code, builds it,
runs all its tests, and sends an email sumarizing the test results. Trigger
the batch to run each time the code changes. Now encourage Continuous
Integration.
The point is some teams don't do that, so if a book on process says
yack-yack-yack, but does not say to do that, the team might overlook it, and
suffer needlessly.
> What next?
You pick one and start doing it.
--
Phlip
[url]http://www.greencheese.org/ZLand[/url] <-- NOT a blog!!!
| |
|
| bill turner wrote:
> Your are probably right, though I did glom onto something Phlip said
> in response to my OP:
[color=darkred]
> Surely, you can see why "all or nothing" resonated so loudly.
That's because the pro coaches like to spend a few ws with a team fully
dependent on them. If the boss sacks the coach early, the team is screwed
because they are not over the learning curve yet.
Otherwise, the coach leaves with oodles of money, and the team remains with
demonstrably more productivity, which will return that money.
--
Phlip
[url]http://www.greencheese.org/ZLand[/url] <-- NOT a blog!!!
| |
| JXStern 2006-03-21, 3:56 am |
| On Sat, 18 Mar 2006 00:51:00 -0500, Ron Jeffries <ronjeffries@acm.org>
wrote:
>The point of Extreme Programming wasn't to merit the word "Extreme", but to set
>forth a combined small set of practices that seemed to the various proponents to
>be helpful and lead to success.
Yes, well, I can see how the word "extreme" is much more convenient
than calling the book "Setting forth a combined small set of practices
that seem to the various proponents to be helpful and lead to
success." I look forward to the next edition of OED where they
include your definition as an alternative to the traditional and
apparently obsolete descriptions of "extreme".
J.
| |
| David Lightstone 2006-03-21, 7:57 am |
|
"bill turner" <username@mn.rr.com> wrote in message
news:kcuu12lhp671ujm1llohbiu8s9puuv8h9m@
4ax.com...
> On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 04:22:19 -0500, Ron Jeffries <ronjeffries@acm.org>
> wrote:
>
>
> Your are probably right, though I did glom onto something Phlip said
> in response to my OP:
>
> And then there was the following from my OP with your reply:
>
> Surely, you can see why "all or nothing" resonated so loudly.
The resonance is so pervasive that a couple of fellows named Stephens and
Rosenberg wrote a book title
Extreme Programming Refactored: The Case Against XP.
>
> ------------------------------------------
> Bill Turner
>
> A faith that the free play of market forces will eventually end in
> Good is, in fact, more 'absurd' than religious belief, for there, at
> least, there is a presumption of an intelligent Agent Who writes
> straight with His crooked lines. - William Pfaff
>
>
> Views expressed are entirely my own and only coincidentally represent
> those of other persons or entities.
| |
| bill turner 2006-03-21, 10:03 pm |
| On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 12:25:43 GMT, "David Lightstone"
<david._NoSpamlightstone@prodigy.net> wrote:
>
>"bill turner" <username@mn.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:kcuu12lhp671ujm1llohbiu8s9puuv8h9m@
4ax.com...
>
>The resonance is so pervasive that a couple of fellows named Stephens and
>Rosenberg wrote a book title
>Extreme Programming Refactored: The Case Against XP.
>
Three or so years ago, I was pretty active in this NG while I was
living in Germany. Shortly after having arrived in Germany our shop
tried to implement XP. For many reasons it failed. I became much more
skeptical of the claims of XP after that and still harbor misgivings.
And, at the time, there were many long discussions of the pros and
cons of using XP in this NG. Since returning to the US, I have not
been able to participate as much as I would like. I have also had more
time to think about our experiences. One of the biggest reason for our
failure to implement XP was our change process. One thing the XP'ers
always claim is that it must be experienced. I'd love to work in an XP
environment to get a true feeling for it. But, that does not mean any
of my skepticism has diminished, either.
I originally read the first three books (at least, I think they were
the first three) and even attended a conference in Cagliari. So, I
didn't exactly go into it blind. Since moving to XP has been tossed
about by various people I've worked for, I thought I should
re-acquaint myself with it, and also try to learn how to mitigate what
I see were our mistakes. Thus, this post. That said, to give good
advice, one needs to be able to talk about the risks, problems, and
weaknesses of the subject in question. I'll take a look at this book.
Thanks.
------------------------------------------
Bill Turner
A faith that the free play of market forces will eventually end in Good is, in fact, more 'absurd' than religious belief, for there, at least, there is a presumption of an intelligent Agent Who writes straight with His crooked lines. - William Pfaff
Views expressed are entirely my own and only coincidentally represent those of other persons or entities.
| |
| Phlip 2006-03-21, 10:03 pm |
| bill turner wrote:
Bill, please note David has repeatedly proven himself a troll. He even
posted under the name Troll4 for a while. He has a hardon for XP, and
teasing people discussing it gives him his jollies. And ...
....That book has been widely panned, even by people who don't like XP. Then
Stephens and Rosenberg wrote another book, /Agile Development with Iconix/,
with Mark Collins-Cope. He got on the XP mailing list, we explained XP to
him, and he gave the impression this was the first time he ever heard of it.
He agreed with what we were saying. Stephen and Rosenberg apparently didn't
tell him about their other book.
[color=darkred]
> Three or so years ago, I was pretty active in this NG while I was
> living in Germany. Shortly after having arrived in Germany our shop
> tried to implement XP. For many reasons it failed.
The goal, if a project won't work, is to fail it as early as possible before
wasting money. (Brand X can't claim that.) So which of the items on Ron's
checklist were you doing? Note that each one should be very obvious if you
are doing them well. None of them require secret behaviors or metrics.
> I became much more
> skeptical of the claims of XP after that and still harbor misgivings.
> And, at the time, there were many long discussions of the pros and
> cons of using XP in this NG.
Many of the cons (and a few of the pros) were made up by people playing
games. 5 years ago this newsgroup was rabidly anti-XP. Any mention of it or
any of the practices would set off screeches and howls of protest. That
doesn't happen any more. But it does bring out the trolls. You might notice,
when they discuss things without the XP or Agile label, they like to talk
about iterative process, testing, etc.
> One of the biggest reason for our
> failure to implement XP was our change process.
Could you say more about what went wrong?
> One thing the XP'ers
> always claim is that it must be experienced.
We claim those who experience it stop asking the dumb questions, like "prove
it works!", very soon.
> I'd love to work in an XP
> environment to get a true feeling for it. But, that does not mean any
> of my skepticism has diminished, either.
Never diminish honest skepticism. One thing that helps that goal is to
dismiss false skepticism, unanswered.
--
Phlip
[url]http://www.greencheese.org/ZLand[/url] <-- NOT a blog!!!
| |
| David Lightstone 2006-03-21, 10:03 pm |
|
"Phlip" <phlipcpp@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:XcUTf.21063$NS6.13529@newssvr30.news.prodigy.com...
> bill turner wrote:
>
> Bill, please note David has repeatedly proven himself a troll. He even
> posted under the name Troll4 for a while. He has a hardon for XP, and
> teasing people discussing it gives him his jollies. And ...
Normally I would not dignify such comments. There are always people so
presumptions as to claim to understand the motivations of others. In this
case mine.
Being so perceptive, Phlip, what is your self assessment of your own
motivation? (You do know why you post Phlip, right?) To educate perhaps? To
defame perhaps? Who cares, when your presentation of software development is
right, it is right, when it is wrong, it is wrong.
Being so perceptive, Phlip why do you waste your skill? Surely you can make
a better living working as a detective, or as an agent of the Central
Intelligence Agency (they certainly could use the help) or perhaps (assuming
you truly s to further the well being of others) as a Clinical
Psychologist
Being so perceptive, Phlip, perhaps you can explain why someone would troll,
or for that matter why someone will choose to post under the name Troll4.
Were I intent upon tweaking you I would even suggest that you foolishly
attempt to answer the following question - Is it trolling to post as a
Troll, or is an element of deception necessary? When you find a statement
that I post to be erroneous, do be so kind as to indicate that the statement
is erroneous(but please, please, do so without effort to explain why you
believe the statement to be erroneous. I wouldn't want you to foolishly or
falsely claim to have fallen victim to troll perpetrate upon the readers of
this newsgroup)
>
>
> ...That book has been widely panned, even by people who don't like XP.
There are always those who try to function as priests, or spin misters
(Those you s to function as interpreted of reality for others.) In this
situation would that not be you?
>
> --
> Phlip
> [url]http://www.greencheese.org/ZLand[/url] <-- NOT a blog!!!
>
| |
| S Perryman 2006-03-22, 4:00 am |
| "Phlip" <phlipcpp@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:XcUTf.21063$NS6.13529@newssvr30.news.prodigy.com...
> bill turner wrote:
> Bill, please note David has repeatedly proven himself a troll. He even
> posted under the name Troll4 for a while. He has a hardon for XP, and
> teasing people discussing it gives him his jollies. And ...
As opposed to being the unofficial Usenet XP muppet ??
[color=darkred]
> ...That book has been widely panned, even by people who don't like XP.
1. Then you should be able to cite *plenty* of references to the words of
these
people who did so. For ease of use, urls would be best.
2. All the feedback I have had from others that have read the book (in
addition to
my own opinions) is pretty much either you love it if you an XP cynic and
you hate
it if you belong to the XP cult.
The notion of cult, and dissenting opinion reaction, is something that runs
strongly
through the book.
Not that you could ever be accused of demonstrating the dissenting opinion
reaction
that the book discusses (WARNING : the author of this posting is a Brit,
like Matt
Stephens) ...
> Then Stephens and Rosenberg wrote another book, /Agile Development with
> Iconix/, with Mark Collins-Cope. He got on the XP mailing list, we
> explained XP to him, and he gave the impression this was the first time he
> ever heard of it. He agreed with what we were saying. Stephen and
> Rosenberg apparently didn't tell him about their other book.
1. How does that correlate with the fact that :
the XP Refactored book has been out a good 12 months before the Agile
Development
with Iconix book.
Matt Stephens was writing in the UK in Application Developer Adviser mag
about
his qualms on XP, when in the same mag and in the same time period Mark
Collins-Cope was also writing about XP.
Are there armies of people who write articles for the same mags, collaborate
on the
same books, who never actually read said mags or collaborators previous
works ??
Regards,
Steven Perryman
| |
| Ron Jeffries 2006-03-25, 10:00 pm |
| On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 03:56:00 GMT, bill turner <username@mn.rr.com> wrote:
>Okay. Is there a sequence to these? I presume coding standard and TDD
>would have to be very near the top because they seem the simplest,
>easiest to understand and to implement. Phlip stated continuous
>integration in another post. Would those be the top three? Does the
>order of implementation depend upon culture? Some other factors? Sorry
>that I haven't had the time to go read your paper. Is this stuff
>covered in that?
I guess I'd implement them based on what was most important to the team. I think
TDD is a very important technical skill to have, and would be inclined toward
Small Releases and the Planning Game, to get the team doing iterative.
But it depends.
Coding standard ... not a biggie in my opinion, as long as you get the names
similar and put the brackets in the same place ...
--
Ron Jeffries
www.XProgramming.com
I'm giving the best advice I have. You get to decide if it's true for you.
| |
| Ron Jeffries 2006-03-25, 10:00 pm |
| On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 12:25:43 GMT, "David Lightstone"
<david._NoSpamlightstone@prodigy.net> wrote:
>
>The resonance is so pervasive that a couple of fellows named Stephens and
>Rosenberg wrote a book title
>Extreme Programming Refactored: The Case Against XP.
Yes. It's too bad that, after refusing help learning what XP actually is, and
after not actually trying XP, they described a process which is not all that
much like the one we actually recommend.
--
Ron Jeffries
www.XProgramming.com
I'm giving the best advice I have. You get to decide if it's true for you.
| |
| Ron Jeffries 2006-03-25, 10:00 pm |
| On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 05:23:26 GMT, JXStern <JXSternChangeX2R@gte.net> wrote:
>On Sat, 18 Mar 2006 00:51:00 -0500, Ron Jeffries <ronjeffries@acm.org>
>wrote:
>
>Yes, well, I can see how the word "extreme" is much more convenient
>than calling the book "Setting forth a combined small set of practices
>that seem to the various proponents to be helpful and lead to
>success." I look forward to the next edition of OED where they
>include your definition as an alternative to the traditional and
>apparently obsolete descriptions of "extreme".
I didn't name it, and if I had I'd probably have named it differently.
--
Ron Jeffries
www.XProgramming.com
I'm giving the best advice I have. You get to decide if it's true for you.
| |
| David Lightstone 2006-03-26, 4:00 am |
|
"Ron Jeffries" <ronjeffries@acm.org> wrote in message
news:rrpb22hghg03olb8giomd63bb05vkftv8p@
4ax.com...
> On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 12:25:43 GMT, "David Lightstone"
> <david._NoSpamlightstone@prodigy.net> wrote:
>
>
> Yes. It's too bad that, after refusing help learning what XP actually is,
> and
> after not actually trying XP, they described a process which is not all
> that
> much like the one we actually recommend.
I have no idea what you are trying to convey here Ron. The wording is a bit
on the confusing side of things
(1) They learned XP on their own
(2) They never tried to practice XP
(3) They describe a process that is pretty close to what you think XP is
intended to be
So much for the strawman, you must try it to understrand it. You were big on
that one several years ago weren't you. (well at least I remember being
pounded by you and your associates with that hammer)?
>
> --
> Ron Jeffries
> www.XProgramming.com
> I'm giving the best advice I have. You get to decide if it's true for you.
| |
| Bjorn Reese 2006-03-26, 7:59 am |
| Ron Jeffries wrote:
> Coding standard ... not a biggie in my opinion, as long as you get the names
> similar and put the brackets in the same place ...
Does coding standard in XP only address stylistic issues?
--
mail1dotstofanetdotdk
| |
|
| Bjorn Reese wrote:
> Ron Jeffries wrote:
>
>
> Does coding standard in XP only address stylistic issues?
A better word for it is "community agreements".
For stylistic issues that don't affect program behavior, the team should
morph all its code towards the most similar style. {} are outdented, space
between if and its (condition), etc.
For style issues that do (such as "smart pointer or reference here?"),
promiscuous pairing and shared code ownership should spread out the best
styles.
Both of these situations should emerge over time, from the simple
instruction that coders should _not_ code deliberately in their own favorite
style, and should learn from the team.
--
Phlip
[url]http://www.greencheese.org/ZLand[/url] <-- NOT a blog!!!
| |
| S Perryman 2006-03-27, 4:00 am |
| "David Lightstone" <david._NoSpamlightstone@prodigy.net> wrote in message
news:pYqVf.21773$NS6.15076@newssvr30.news.prodigy.com...
> "Ron Jeffries" <ronjeffries@acm.org> wrote in message
> news:rrpb22hghg03olb8giomd63bb05vkftv8p@
4ax.com...
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
> I have no idea what you are trying to convey here Ron. The wording is a
> bit on the confusing side of things
> (1) They learned XP on their own
> (2) They never tried to practice XP
> (3) They describe a process that is pretty close to what you think XP is
> intended to be
(4) They had input to their book from people who were actually on XP
projects.
But then of course, we could say :
FORALL people IN (4) :
(4.1) They learned XP on their own ...
Regards,
Steven Perryman
| |
| Ron Jeffries 2006-03-28, 4:01 am |
| On Sun, 26 Mar 2006 13:06:07 +0200, Bjorn Reese <breese@see.signature> wrote:
>Ron Jeffries wrote:
>
>
>Does coding standard in XP only address stylistic issues?
It addresses whatever the team thinks they should agree upon. What would you
like your team to agree upon?
--
Ron Jeffries
www.XProgramming.com
I'm giving the best advice I have. You get to decide if it's true for you.
| |
| Bjorn Reese 2006-04-10, 4:05 am |
| Ron Jeffries wrote:
> It addresses whatever the team thinks they should agree upon.
Can the customer decide a coding standard (or parts thereof) for the
team?
--
mail1dotstofanetdotdk
| |
|
| Bjorn Reese wrote:
> Can the customer decide a coding standard (or parts thereof) for the
> team?
Google the Customer Bill of Rights and the Developer Bill of Rights.
Those Bills of Rights essentially define what roles appear in which part of
the Whole Team.
The brief answer "No" doesn't help if Customer Team individuals also occupy
developer roles.
--
Phlip
[url]http://www.greencheese.org/ZLand[/url] <-- NOT a blog!!!
| |
| Ron Jeffries 2006-04-11, 8:04 am |
| On Mon, 10 Apr 2006 11:22:32 +0200, Bjorn Reese <breese@see.signature> wrote:
>Ron Jeffries wrote:
>
>
>Can the customer decide a coding standard (or parts thereof) for the
>team?
I wouldn't think so, but there might be some specific business need if the
source code is going to be sold.
--
Ron Jeffries
www.XProgramming.com
I'm giving the best advice I have. You get to decide if it's true for you.
| |
| Soft4All 2006-05-16, 6:40 am |
| CAD/CAE/CAM/EDA/GIS/PCB/FEA/CNC/CFD low price software. FTP! Highest quality
of service! Real cd-catalog!!!
Welcome searchers and users of softwares which we can offer. We would like to offer you some important
softwares you are looking on our site http://soft4all.biz Full version of software.
1. Professional cracking of any kind of software (CAD, CAM, CAE, EDA, GIS, PCB, FEA, FEM, CNC, CFD, PDS, 3D, Optics etc.)
designed for any kind of operating systems (Windows 95/98/ME/2000/XP, Linux, FreeBSD, OS/2, MAC OS etc.)
2. Producing keygens, licenses for different protection systems (FlexLM, SentinelLM, ElanLM, CrypKey, etc.)
3. Producing emulators for any kind of dongles (SentinelPro, SentinelSuperPro, Hasp4, Hardlock, WIBU, Guardant, etc.)
4. Documentation (tutorials and help). We will reply very fast.
We have very big interes to build good and long relations.
All Software Listed as followed are Unlimited version! Their function
is completely the same as the original retail version! the Only exception
is they NO need any type of hardlock, such as Dongle etc. that says, you can
install and use on any number of computer, All are NO limit to time and func
tion!
http://Soft4all.biz
http://Soft4all.biz
http://Soft4all.biz
Here is an example of the most popular offered software :
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
!!!Please don't ask this www-board. We dont'contact you in this www-board.!!!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FTP DOWNLOAD 2D3 BOUJOU THREE V3.0-ISO 1CD + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD 3DALIENS GLU3D V13.05 FOR MAYA 6.5 + crack + FTP DOWNLOAD BENTLEY.Stuctural.v8.05.02.12 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD BENTLEY.Stuctural.v8.05.03.62 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD BENTLEY.TriForma.IFC.2x.Interface.v8.05.02.17 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Bergen Fill Vol. 1 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Bergen Fill Vol. 2 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Bernina Artista 3.0 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Bernina Artista 4.0 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Bes-100E v 2.13 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Bes-100E v 2.14 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD BETTER HOMES AND GARDENS LANDSCAPE AND DECK DESIGNER V7.0 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Biographic AI Implant v1.81 for Maya 5.0 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Blaupunkt Teleatlas Benelux DX 2005,2006 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Bluecontrol v2.5 SR2 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD BlueMarble Geographic Transformer v5.1.1.3 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD BobCAD-CAM 20.2 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Bobcad-CAM AND Bobart v20.1 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD BOBCAD-CAM AND BOBART V20.2 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD BOBCAD-CAM V20.5 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD BOBCAD-CAM_AND_BOBART_V20.2 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD BOBCAD-CAM_AND_BOBART_V20.6 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD BOBCAD-CAMAND BOBART V20.4 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD BOBWIRE V19.3 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD BOEING GIS FEATURE COLLECTION MODULE V1.2 FOR BOEING SOFTPLOTTER V4.1 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD BOEING SOFTPLOTTER V4.1 WITH.AIRFIELD + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD BOEING.KORK.DIGITAL.MAPPING.SYSTEM.V14.0 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Borland StarTeam 5.3 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD BricsCad Architecturals v4.1.0015 for AutoCAD + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD BricsCad Architecturals v4.1.0015 for BricsCad + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD BricsCad Pro v6.0 0012 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD BricsCad Pro v6.0.0006 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD BricsCad Pro v6.2.0010 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD BricsCad Structural Frames.v2.1.0003 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Broomstick BASS VSTI 1.0 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Brother PE 4 Designer + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Brother PE 5 Designer + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Brother PE 5 Designer CD-BOOK + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Brother PE 5.5 Designer + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Brother PE 5.6 Designer + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Brother PE 5.6 Designer + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Brother PE 6 Designer + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Bryce 5.0 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD BRYCE 5.5 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Buzz Edit + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Buzz Edit 3.38 WITH BUZZ TOOLS + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Buzz Explorer 1.02 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Cabinet Vision Solid 3.5 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD CABINET VISION SOLID v4.0 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD CABINET VISION SOLID V4.0 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD CAD EASY EASYSITE AUTOCAD V2 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Cadance confrml50 base ISO 1CD + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD CADCAM-E CAT5WORKS V2.0 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD CADCAM-E PSCAT5 V2.2 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD CADCAM-E PSPRO V3.1 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD CADENCE ALLEGRO SPB RELEASE 15.5 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Cadence Allegro SPB V15.5 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Cadence Allegro SPB V15.5 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD CADENCE ISSOLAME V6.9 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD CADENCE ORCAD UNISON SUITE PRO V10.5 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Cadence spb 15.2 update + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Cadence.Allegro.Silicon.Package.Board.V15.5.1 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Cadence.Specman.Elite.V5.0 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD CAD-KAS PDF Split and Merge v1.0 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Cadlink Signlab 7 rev 1 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD CADlink SignLab 7.0 R1 Printer Packages CADlink SignLab e6.1 Revision 6 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD CADlink SignLab 7.0 Revision 1 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD CADRASTER LTX V6.10 FOR AUTOCAD + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD CAD-Schroer.Medusa.4.v2 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD CadSoft.Eagle.v4.16r1 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD CAE.PowerTools.FEvis.Publisher.v1.1.0.9 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD CAEFEM v9.0 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD CAEFEM.v8.21 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Cakewalk Rapture 1.0 VSTi DXi RTAS AU + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Caligari Truespace v6.5 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD CAM Expert v2.0.4.8 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD CAM_Expert_v2.0.4.7 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD CAM_Expert_v2.0.4.8 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD CAM350 v8.7 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD CAM350 v8.7.1 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD CAM350.v9.0.1 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD GGU.Time.Graph.v6.14 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD GGU.Time.Graph.v6.15 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD GGU.Triaxial.v3.12 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD GGU.Underpin.v3.10 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD GGUCAD.v5.20 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD GGU-Pumptest.v2.11 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD GGU-Retain v4 21 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD GGU-Stability.v7.10 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD GGU-Transient.v4.10 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD GGU-Triaxial.v3.13 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD GIBBSCAM 2005 V7.7 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD GisBase Pac 1.18 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD PTC ROUTED SYSTEMS DESIGNER V6.0 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD PTC ROUTED SYSTEMS DESIGNER V6.0 M010 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD PTC.Pro.ENGINEER.WILDFIRE.2.0.Datecode.2004490 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD PTC_INTRALINK_V3.4_M010 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD PTC_PRO_ENGINEER_WILDFIRE_V2.0_M0100_ISO 3CD + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD PTC_ROUTED_SYSTEMS_DESIGNER_V5.5 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Punto 6.01 for XP + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Puntograms Proline Designer 7.6.3 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Puntotek Gold 1.5 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Pure Motion EditStudio v4.13 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD QNX Momentics Professional V6.2.1A + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD QNX Neutrino 6.2.1 For WinNT + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD QuarkXPress 7.0 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD QUARKXPRESS V6.1 MAC OSX ISO 1CD + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Quest QDesigner Physical Architect Enterprise 12 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Quicklogic Quickworks v9.64 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Rainbow EMBROIDERY V5.99 Gs( DOS) + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD RAINDROP_GEOMAGIC_STUDIO_V7.0 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Raytech - Bsb Nautical Carts - Worldwide + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD REALVIZ Stitcher v4.0 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD REALVIZ Stitcher v4.0 incl_Keygen + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Rebis AutoPIPE 6.20 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD REDASOFT VISUAL CLONING V3.0 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD REDASOFT_VISUAL_CLONING_V3.0 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD REIUSA STAAD FOUNDATION V2.0 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD REIUSA Staad Pro V2005 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD REIUSA.STAAD.PRO.V2005 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD RENESAS CC32R V4.30 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD RENESAS NC30WA V5.30 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD RES2DINV v3.54.44 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Research.Systems.Envi.v4.1 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Research.Systems.IDL.v6.3 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD RESEARCHSYSTEM SILIDAR V1.0 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Richpeace Design Pro 2000 V 4.1 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD RichPeace Design Pro 2000 V 4.28 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD RISA TECHNOLOGIES RISA 3D V5.5 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD RISA TECHNOLOGIES RISA FLOOR V2.0 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD ROBOLAB V2.5.4 MAC OSX ISO 1CD + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD ROCSCIENCE EXAMINE3D V4.099 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD ROCSCIENCE ROCDATA V3.015 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD ROCSCIENCE ROCFALL V4.042 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD ROCSCIENCE ROCPLANE V2.032 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD ROCSCIENCE ROCSUPPORT V3.005 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD ROCSCIENCE SLIDE V5.019 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD ROCSCIENCE SWEDGE V4.080 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD ROCSCIENCE UNWEDGE V3.009 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD ROCSCIENCE_ROCSUPPORT_V3.006 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD ROCSCIENCE_SLIDE_V5.021 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD UGS SOLIDEDGE V17 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD UGS SOLIDEDGE V17.0 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD UGS.I-DEAS.NX.V11M3 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD UGS.TECHNOMATIX.EM-WORKPLACE.V7.1.2 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD UGS_IMAGEWARE_V12.0 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD UGS_NX_V3.0_GERMAN_DOKUMENTATION + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD UGS_SOLID_EDGE_V16_UPDATE_5 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD ULEAD DVD WORKSHOP V2.0 CDVERSION ISO 1CD + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Ulix Stitch 2.0 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Ultra Flex Express 7.5 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD ULTRA-Flex 7.5 for STIKA + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD ULTRA-Flex Interactive simulator 7 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD UltraLine Routenplaner v4.0 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD UMC-0.18u FE lib + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Unigraphics NX4 CAST + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD VAG ElsaWin Data v3.20 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD VAG ElsaWin v3.20 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Vector Super (80,000 Super Designs) + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD VectorFX VOL 150.000 VectorLogos + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD VectorFX Vol2 Design and Artwork + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Vectorworks 11 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Vehicle Graphics + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD VENTURE FENIX V4.1 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD VERO_MACHINING_STRATEGIST_V6.1 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Versata Logic Suite v5.6.4 ISO 1CD + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Versata Logic Suite v5.6.4 ISO 1CD + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Vinyl CAD 2 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Vinyl Express Master LXi + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Vinyl Ripper v1.0 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Visiosonic PCDJ Red VRM 7.2 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Visual Flow 4.1 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Visual Mill 5.01 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Visual.Mill.v5.08-SHOCK + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD VNI PV Wave Product Family v8.5.1 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Volvo Wiring v03 2005 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD VOX 3D Planer + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD VRML Export 2006 For AutoCAD v3.4.0.50317 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD VTC AUTOCAD 2005 FOR ARCHITECTS + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD VTC AUTODESYS FORMZ R.I.P BRIAN 83 05 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD VXCADCAM V11.21 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Walker Effects v2.1 Professional for Adobe After Effects + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Wasatch 5.0 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Wilcom 6.1D + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Wilcom 7.0 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Wilcom 7.1D + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Wilcom 7.1E + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Wilcom 7.1F SP3 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Wilcom 7.2G + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Wilcom 8.0 PET CD [ Interactive Training Tutorial for Wilcom 8 ] + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Wilcom 8.0M SP1 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Wilcom 8.0N + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Wilcom 9.0 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Wilcom 9.0 Exploring ES 9 With WorkFlow + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Wilcom 9.0 PET CD + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Wilcom 9.0 WorkFlow + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Wilcom 9.0R WITH SP3 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Wilcom 9.0R WITH SP4 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Wilcom Tecos Mira 2000 V 4.2 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD WinDaisy 4.5 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Wings 2000 V4.0 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Wings 3.0 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Wings Xp 1.50 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Wings Xp 1.80 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD WinLens Plus v1.1 6a + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Winner V6.1 a1 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Wm Kat Atris v3.11 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Wolfram MatheMatica V5.2 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Wonderware Active Factory v9.1.000.0216 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Wonderware Industrial SQL Server v9.0.000.0341 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD WORLEY LABS FPRIME V2.0 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD WORLEY LABSG2 V1.7 FOR LW + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD W-Tools LWCAD v1.0b for LightWave Incl Keygen 2D3 BOUJOU THREE V3.0 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Xara3D 5.02 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD X-HDL_v3.2.55 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Xilinx EDK 8.1 (1 dvd) + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD XILINX Embedded Development Kit and.XPS Ver7.1 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD XILINX Embedded Development Kit and.XPS Ver7.1 Incl Sp2 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Xilinx ISE v7.1i + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Xilinx ISE v7.1i + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Xilinx ISE v7.1i ISO 3CD + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD ZAXWERKS 3D FLAG AE V1.0.0 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD ZAXWERKS 3D FLAG PP V1.0.0 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Zemax-EE 2005 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Zsk Epcwin 2.01 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD Zsk Epcwin 2.37 + crack + keygen + serial
FTP DOWNLOAD ZSK Magic Stitch II Ver 1.20.8704 + crack + keygen + serial
If you are interested in or want to get more software list ,please go:
http://Soft4all.biz
http://Soft4all.biz
http://Soft4all.biz
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Keywords: buy warez cd; free download; free software; full warez cd;
no banners; cheap warez cd; free warez cd; full retail software cd;
full iso cd; download iso; download warez; freeware; free games;
upload crack; download crack; free ftp download; fast ftp server;
serials; serial number; free warez server; fast ftp download; low price;
download link; uk; england; ireland; iceland; italy; italia; switzerland;
canada; dutch; holland; norway; spain; germany; greece; india; australia;
germany; usa; canada; china; |
|
|
|
|