1. Permeation of RUP and XP on Small and Middle-Size Projects KREŠIMIR FERTALJ University of Zagreb Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Computing Department of applied computing Unska 3, Zagreb 10000, CROATIA kresimir.fertalj@fer.hr

2. 2 Fertalj: Permeation of RUP and XP on Small and Middle-Size Projects, 6th DAAD Workshop, 2006. Introduction  Most of the present software projects fit into the class of middle-sized projects XP is too “little and firm”, RUP is too “big and universal” »for literal and strict implementation.  Releasing and adjusting some of the directives, and combining ideas of both of these philosophies, as a logical solution for filling the gap between the two.

3. 3 Fertalj: Permeation of RUP and XP on Small and Middle-Size Projects, 6th DAAD Workshop, 2006. Overview of the RUP  RUP - Rational Unified Process formerly Unified Development Process a universal software development framework provides a number of predefined “templates” (roadmaps) which model different types of processes suited for different types of software development projects enables the user to choose the subset of artefacts that will be produced and even to create its own artefacts  RUP emphasises the “best practices” Iterative development, Management of requirements, Application of component-based architectures, Visual modelling, Continuous quality verification, Control and tracking of changes.

4. 4 Fertalj: Permeation of RUP and XP on Small and Middle-Size Projects, 6th DAAD Workshop, 2006. The RUP lifecycle  Inception Determines the scope, the preliminary schedule and the basic architecture  Vision document  Elaboration Clarifies the system architecture, determines the most important requirements and risks  Software Requirements Specification, Software Architecture Document and a refined project plan  Construction Manufacturing and iterative improvement of the system being developed  Development plan  Transition Testing and releasing the product, fine tuning based on the users’ feedback  Change Management

5. 5 Fertalj: Permeation of RUP and XP on Small and Middle-Size Projects, 6th DAAD Workshop, 2006. Iteration and phases  Phases Inception Elaboration ConstructionTransition Core Workflows Requirements Analysis Design Implementation Testing iter. #1 iter. #2 ————— iter. #n-1 iter. #n Increments

6. 6 Fertalj: Permeation of RUP and XP on Small and Middle-Size Projects, 6th DAAD Workshop, 2006. Overview of XP  XP - Extreme Programming  The values - establish the basic rules Communication, Simplicity, Feedback, Courage and Respect.  The basic principles – operating principles Humanity, Economics, Mutual benefit, Self-Similarity, Improvement, Diversity, Reflection, Flow, Opportunity, Redundancy, Failure, Quality, Baby Steps, Accepted Responsibility  Practices – concrete directions Beck recognizes Primary and Corollary practices some authors do some further classifications

7. 7 Fertalj: Permeation of RUP and XP on Small and Middle-Size Projects, 6th DAAD Workshop, 2006. RUP Practices Primary practices: Stories (User Stories), Weekly Cycle, Quarterly Cycle and Slack, Sit Together, Whole Team, Informative Workspace, Energised Work (formerly Sustainable Pace), Pair programming, Incremental Design (comprises two former – Refactoring and Simple Design), Test-First Programming (Continuous Testing), Ten-Minute Build, and Continuous Integration. Corollary practices: Real Customer Involvement (formerly On-Site Customer), Incremental Deployment. Negotiated Scope Contract, Pay-Per-Use, Team Continuity, Shrinking Teams, Root-Cause Analysis, Code and Tests, Shared Code (formerly Collective Code Ownership), Single Code Base, and Daily Deployment.

8. 8 Fertalj: Permeation of RUP and XP on Small and Middle-Size Projects, 6th DAAD Workshop, 2006.

9. 9 XP lifecycle User Acceptance ExplorationProductionizing Continuous Integration Priorities Effort Estimate Supplements MaintenancePlanningIterations to ReleaseDeath (User) Stories Stories for the next iteration Pair Programming AnalysisDesignTest plan Testing Review / Inspection Test Shared Code, Single Code Base Feedback Short/Small Release Release Update Final Release

10. 10 Fertalj: Permeation of RUP and XP on Small and Middle-Size Projects, 6th DAAD Workshop, 2006. Permeation of RUP and XP  Best of Breed The majority of software is too dynamic and unpredictable for “huge and time-consuming” RUP, and software projects are too expensive and important to be left to “ad- hoc” planning in XP.  XP focus set on coding, short projects (up to a year), small teams (up to ten), reduced documentation, on-site customer, pair programming and short releases as main risk reduction mechanisms.  RUP a configurable process framework, adaptable, no limits to the project size, price or the team size and deployment, the main risk reduction mechanisms are iterations and detailed documentation.

11. 11 Fertalj: Permeation of RUP and XP on Small and Middle-Size Projects, 6th DAAD Workshop, 2006. Preliminirary Study

12. 12 Fertalj: Permeation of RUP and XP on Small and Middle-Size Projects, 6th DAAD Workshop, 2006. System Analysis and Design

13. 13 Fertalj: Permeation of RUP and XP on Small and Middle-Size Projects, 6th DAAD Workshop, 2006. System Construction

14. 14 Fertalj: Permeation of RUP and XP on Small and Middle-Size Projects, 6th DAAD Workshop, 2006. Transition

15. 15 Fertalj: Permeation of RUP and XP on Small and Middle-Size Projects, 6th DAAD Workshop, 2006. Premise  RUP highly formal and structured providing out-of-the-box roadmaps for a number of project types does not say anything about how to actually run a project  XP devoted to everyday life and low-level management of the development team does not insist on documentation does not provide project templates people oriented methodology, relying on human intelligence

16. 16 Fertalj: Permeation of RUP and XP on Small and Middle-Size Projects, 6th DAAD Workshop, 2006. Conclusion  A permeation presented in the paper retained the four RUP alike phases in project lifecycle significantly reduced the documentation, selecting the artefacts necessary to support a little larger and less compact team than expected in XP adopts reduced XP’s people-orientation and most of the XP practices, especially communication, frequent small releases, code refactoring and testing, etc. XP practice of writing tests before or at least in parallel with code proved to be an excellent risk reduction mechanism in practice.  The proposed combination of RUP and XP certainly appropriate for small and middle-size projects efficiently exploits the human experience in SW development

17. ? ?