Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:Leading National Brand (Score 1) 266

I agree on the point about kirkland signatures goal.

Let's assume for fun that it is not a goal, but an actual claim the balls were "equivalent or better than leading national brands". Every single term has to be defined, and likely in court, since those are not legal terms. Leading national brands is plural so, top 3, top 5, top 50%? Then, in golf balls each brand has many different balls. So, which products are we comparing from each brand. Then, what parameters are golf balls measured against each other. Once we have that what does equivalent or better mean. Equivalent in plain English does not usually mean exactly equal, and there is such a thing as measurement error. So, equivalent could mean within 5% of the leading brands in whatever parameters are measured.

Comment Re:Is it just branding or is it a real patent issu (Score 1) 266

About $199 new from Costco, when I bought mine many years ago. Not sure what the current Costco sets run.

And, you can get a custom built set from Monark Golf for about $350. Pick your own knock off gold head, shafts, and grips and the desired length. Which is nice if you are shorter or taller than average. Funny when people are paying thousands for custom name brand clubs.

Comment Re:yes they should (Score 1) 1081

Every state has a minimum of 3 electors regardless of population. So, using 2010 population.

from http://www.thegreenpapers.com/Census10/HouseAndElectors.phtml

California has 37000K people and 55 electors.
3 electors per...
Alaska 721K, Delaware 900K, Montana 100K, North Dakota 675K, South Dakota 819K, Wyoming 568K, Vermont 630K = 4,413K 21 electors
4 electors per...
Hawaii 1300K, Idaho 1500K, Maine 1300K, New Hampshire 1300K, Rhode Island 1000K = 6,400K 20 Electors
5 electors per
New Mexico 2000K, Nebraska 1800K, West Virginia 1850K = 5650K 15 electors

Total: 16000K people control 56 electors.

States with half the people have as much influence over Presidential Elections as California. I am not necessarily saying the Electoral College or 2 Senators per state are bad. But, let's realize that the Founding Fathers constructed a system that gives less populous states a non-trivially greater influence over presidential elections and the Senate.

Comment Re:long methods and coupling (Score 1) 497

When I have run into long methods the solution usually is not a deep call stack, but instead that the method has chained together 20 10 line logical units. It would make the code more readable to have that be 20 sequential (not nested) calls to well named functions that accurately describe what they are doing. Often those logical units are different if/else blocks as well, so extracting them makes it easier to unit test all branches rather than trying to set up 200 different branch possibilities on one method.

Comment Re:Not a hard and fast rule... (Score 1) 281

I think that DevOps or more accurately deployment automation and Continuous Delivery make microservices possible. Without the end to end automated tests and the deployment automation to deploy the microservices, plus Electric Cloud's software or its equivalent to track what configuration of microservices is actually being tested and track that into production. Trying to manually attempt a microservices integration test across a dozen teams working on tens of microservices would likely result in a halting of development for a significant amount of time while all the integration issues are worked out, and then making sure that makes it to production is another manual headache. Automation to run that multiple microservice integration multiple time a day means less change to blame for problems which should make it easier to track the problem to a culprit and fix quickly.

Once you are doing continuous delivery into test, it should stretch to production, so you are not only testing the application but the production deployment process as well. If you want that to happen the silos between operations and development need to be broken down because it is a little silly for development to work on all that reliable automation and have operations say "Nope, we have our own automation tools.", or to wait until the very end to hand off the tools to operations instead of having them involved from the beginning.

I will say I am not attempting fine grained microservices. I like to say microservices with "micro" very loosely defined.

Comment Re:When you do microservices, it isn't one project (Score 1) 281

All large projects should be modularized in general, if for no other reason than to maintain the sanity of people. Microservices are slapping a remote interface onto a module. In Java, a little clever use of interfaces and dependency injection, and a "microservice" can be remote or local with almost no change to client code (think proxy pattern). There is change to client configuration due to local needing data store connection information and remote needing remote discovery information.

You could divide teams along these modules, but I find that causes a lot of coordination overhead. I like dividing teams along lines of delivering end user visible features and they work on whatever module is necessary. It helps to reduce the temptation to write the same thing 3 or 4 times in slightly different ways because no one wants to go through the effort required to convince some one else to put that in their module. I generally try to have teams work in the same area for a long period of time which means they usually don't have to be experts in every module, but instead a few that are core to their area, know a few that are peripheral, and have a passing understanding of the rest. It does require good test driven development, continuous integration, teams that will fix whatever regression they cause, and teams that respect other teams enough to "do unto others..." and write comprehensible and testable code.

As for deciding what your modules are... That depends. It can evolve, but it requires some one to pay attention to what is being developed and realize when new responsibilities are showing up that belong in a new module. Hopefully, many team members learn to recognize and raise modularization opportunities. I like the Domain Driven Design approach as a starting point, but that it has quite a bit of overhead that would not be appropriate for some software.

Comment Re: Rule #1 (Score 1) 281

Some other suggestions...

Another place to look is whether the Spring Planning meeting is really just Sprint Planning.
      Has backlog prioritization been rolled into Sprint planning? Could the product owner do that during the Sprint?
      Is defect triage being done during "Sprint Planning"? Then you are doing two meetings. Which might be just fine, but maybe not everyone has to be present.
    Are you doing design and coordination during the meeting? Then, you are combining sprint planning with design and coordination efforts. This may be a good thing. It can be better to just block off the time each Sprint to get everyone together, rather than doing it adhoc and having to deal with a key person having a conflict. Plus design can often elicit questions about requirements, so it can be good to have the product owner available.

Comment Use the right tool for the job... (Score 2) 175

And, if either tool works use the one you know best. And, try to write code well, so you don't get stuck when the right decision now becomes the wrong decision later because things change.

From a data store side, there are reasons to use an RDBMS and one or more NoSQL solutions all together. They handle different situations better and if you have any decent level of complexity you find the boxes defined by LAMP or MEAN too confining. I generally stay away from MySQL due to the licensing issues, but MariaDB and Amazon Aurora fit the same space. I used PostgreSQL for one solution. Of course in the AWS case you might forgo MongoDB altogether for Dynamo because why deal with operating Mongo when Amazon will take care of that with Dynamo.

Some of us have to deal with corporate standards and actually neither LAMP or MEAN is actually allowed, which makes this whole thing a pointless flame war.

Comment All yuor eggs in one basket (Score 1) 173

"Senate appropriators suggested that NASA’s plans announced earlier this year to procure Soyuz seats for missions in 2018 indicated that the agency was not confident at even this early stage that the two companies with commercial crew contracts, Boeing and SpaceX, could remain on schedule to begin flights in 2017."

Clearly the correct approach is to put all your eggs in one basket at any given time.

If you delay American crew launches until 2019, then NASA is going to procure Soyuz seats for 2019 and maybe 2020.

Comment Re:Conduit (Score 1) 557

Run wire to every room might also be reasonable, as well, but terminate at a blank wall plate. 2 Cat5E + 2 RG6 coax can run around .30/ft depending on where you get it. There are even bundles which seem to cost more than separate. But, at that price depending on the distance of the run, the wall plate and connectors can be 30-50% of the cost of the run. So, run the cable from a closet to a blank plate and only put connectors on the plates that are actually used.

Comment Re:Stupid (Score 1) 387

Global collaboration is a huge challenge that has not really been solved. Or, more accurately the solutions are still not as good as being in person. But, presumably some one made the cost benefit decision that the advantages of being global make up for the disadvantages. (skeptical undertones intended)

From a classroom perspective and any situation where you can get a bunch of people together to solve hard problems, vast amounts of whiteboard space are a highly effective tool. The problem is after spending a bunch of time going down bunny trails, back tracking, etc... which the white board is really good for, the final result needs to be put into a form that can be made persistent in some way. For something short term that will be used immediately, a photo might be good enough to refresh memories, when necessary. For something to be kept longer some one gets the thankless task of transcribing the results. Although, I thank that person profusely for doing something incredibly important but tedious.

Comment Re:No. (Score 1) 507

Of course you would say that. You would still be wrong. What you call "organizational dysfunctions" -- but everyone else would call "a normal mix of people" -- can be handled more effectively under a waterfall-like process than under an Agile one.

Well, that is the Taylor versus Deming argument. Very loosely summarized as: People are the problem versus people are the solution. That is more fundamental than Waterfall versus Agile. It seems like it is what drives people to one process or the other.

Agile is likely to be less efficient because you start lots of developers writing code before anyone has a good grip on what the project should look like

It has not been my experience that you start with developers writing lots of code before understanding the project. You have to fill the backlog before doing anything. That means prioritizing backlog items which means knowing enough about those items to gain some prioritization. Although one trap is de-prioritizing really valuable things that you don't are risky rather than doing the opposite which it prioritize efforts to resolve that risk in some way. The shorter the sprints means the smaller the backlog item needs to be to fit in a sprint which means a fairly high degree of understanding of requirement and design in order to split stories small enough. The only significant difference with respect to waterfall then is that the best splitting and understanding of requirements and design is on near term items and later items are more vague.

I can write a whole bunch of other stuff because there are consequences to every choice and those consequences are handled using different techniques. And, on top of the general consequences, every organization is a complex system with many hidden and visible feedback loop and both waterfall and agile interact with that system good, bad, and sideways. Change from one to the other and all of those feedback loops kick in and new ones are created and the whole system can react in unexpected ways. This is nothing new, Six Sigma, TQM, Lean, and others I have never heard of get brought into organizations and perturb the system in unexpected ways.

Slashdot Top Deals

"There is nothing new under the sun, but there are lots of old things we don't know yet." -Ambrose Bierce

Working...