Comments for Mark Staples http://www.markstaples.com Ruminations and observations about software, technology, and beer. Sun, 27 Dec 2009 00:17:32 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 Comment on Dark Ale Again by Mark Staples » Blog Archive » Bottling Day http://www.markstaples.com/2009/12/07/dark-ale-again/comment-page-1/#comment-15400 Mark Staples » Blog Archive » Bottling Day Sun, 27 Dec 2009 00:17:32 +0000 http://www.markstaples.com/?p=147#comment-15400 [...] day after Christmas is Bottling Day!  Laying down the Dark Ale for Autumn and Winter.  I had racked it 4-5 days beforehand.  Final gravity was 1.01, so it will [...] [...] day after Christmas is Bottling Day!  Laying down the Dark Ale for Autumn and Winter.  I had racked it 4-5 days beforehand.  Final gravity was 1.01, so it will [...]

]]> Comment on Breaking the Fractal V Lifecycle? by Mark http://www.markstaples.com/2009/12/11/breaking-the-fractal-v-lifecycle/comment-page-1/#comment-15389 Mark Sat, 12 Dec 2009 02:41:36 +0000 http://www.markstaples.com/?p=153#comment-15389 I don't think of Plan-Do-Check as a lifecycle - it abstracts over levels of design abstraction, which are usually explicit in a lifecycle model. But OK, I agree with your point - in the original V model, there's no explicit "Check Your Plan" activity, and if it's implicit, it's probably implicit within the "Plan" activity. Still, I think if you admit the Fractal extensions to the V model, you are then free to think of a "Check Your Plan" activity as being either in the "Plan" activity (X)OR the "Check" activity. I think the better choice is to regard the original V model "Plan" activities as really being little micro-V Plan/Do/Check(-Your-Plan) iterations with null "Do" steps. At this point I feel like I'm arguing about how many angels could fit on the head of a pin. Maybe that's a sign that I'm pushing this point of view a little too far! I don’t think of Plan-Do-Check as a lifecycle – it abstracts over levels of design abstraction, which are usually explicit in a lifecycle model. But OK, I agree with your point – in the original V model, there’s no explicit “Check Your Plan” activity, and if it’s implicit, it’s probably implicit within the “Plan” activity.

Still, I think if you admit the Fractal extensions to the V model, you are then free to think of a “Check Your Plan” activity as being either in the “Plan” activity (X)OR the “Check” activity. I think the better choice is to regard the original V model “Plan” activities as really being little micro-V Plan/Do/Check(-Your-Plan) iterations with null “Do” steps.

At this point I feel like I’m arguing about how many angels could fit on the head of a pin. Maybe that’s a sign that I’m pushing this point of view a little too far!

]]> Comment on Breaking the Fractal V Lifecycle? by liming http://www.markstaples.com/2009/12/11/breaking-the-fractal-v-lifecycle/comment-page-1/#comment-15388 liming Fri, 11 Dec 2009 08:39:39 +0000 http://www.markstaples.com/?p=153#comment-15388 agree with your points. :-) I think the difference comes from how much one can "re-interpret" the right side of the original V when making it into W or fractal V. The right side of the original V means testing and it also means "checking code against" early life cycle corresponding artifacts, NOT checking early life cycle artifacts themselves. One can certainly relax that into a general "check" of anything. :-) In that case, maybe the model should be called the fractal PDC (Plan-Do-Check). agree with your points. :-) I think the difference comes from how much one can “re-interpret” the right side of the original V when making it into W or fractal V. The right side of the original V means testing and it also means “checking code against” early life cycle corresponding artifacts, NOT checking early life cycle artifacts themselves.
One can certainly relax that into a general “check” of anything. :-) In that case, maybe the model should be called the fractal PDC (Plan-Do-Check).

]]> Comment on Fractal V Lifecycle by Mark Staples » Blog Archive » Breaking the Fractal V Lifecycle? http://www.markstaples.com/2009/05/25/fractal-v-lifecycle/comment-page-1/#comment-15387 Mark Staples » Blog Archive » Breaking the Fractal V Lifecycle? Fri, 11 Dec 2009 07:31:38 +0000 http://www.markstaples.com/?p=86#comment-15387 [...] has raised three points in reference to my Fractal V Lifecycle.  His questions are probing the limits of the model in interesting ways. Before I discuss them, [...] [...] has raised three points in reference to my Fractal V Lifecycle.  His questions are probing the limits of the model in interesting ways. Before I discuss them, [...]

]]> Comment on Fractal V Lifecycle for Pre-Project Activities by liming http://www.markstaples.com/2009/12/08/fractal-v-lifecycle-for-pre-project-activities/comment-page-1/#comment-15386 liming Thu, 10 Dec 2009 22:03:09 +0000 http://www.markstaples.com/?p=149#comment-15386 some finer points that you may not agree.. :-) http://limingzhu.posterous.com/envy-un-v some finer points that you may not agree.. :-)
http://limingzhu.posterous.com/envy-un-v

]]> Comment on Fractal V Lifecycle by Mark Staples » Blog Archive » Fractal V Lifecycle for Pre-Project Activities http://www.markstaples.com/2009/05/25/fractal-v-lifecycle/comment-page-1/#comment-15384 Mark Staples » Blog Archive » Fractal V Lifecycle for Pre-Project Activities Tue, 08 Dec 2009 03:33:24 +0000 http://www.markstaples.com/?p=86#comment-15384 [...] has got a new article version of my earlier blog post on the Fractal V Lifecycle up on alinement.net magazine/community website. He’s also added [...] [...] has got a new article version of my earlier blog post on the Fractal V Lifecycle up on alinement.net magazine/community website. He’s also added [...]

]]> Comment on Academic Academy Awards by liming http://www.markstaples.com/2009/09/25/academic-academy-awards/comment-page-1/#comment-15269 liming Fri, 25 Sep 2009 16:49:40 +0000 http://www.markstaples.com/?p=140#comment-15269 nice ideas...not cheap though. :-) I probably should have used "fully validated ideas" instead of "validated ideas". Workshop papers do have some degree of validation. Actually, I wanted to use (relatively) "easily validated ideas" ... you know what I mean.. nice ideas…not cheap though. :-)
I probably should have used “fully validated ideas” instead of “validated ideas”. Workshop papers do have some degree of validation. Actually, I wanted to use (relatively) “easily validated ideas” … you know what I mean..

]]> Comment on Reflections at WICSA by Mark Staples » Blog Archive » Academic Academy Awards http://www.markstaples.com/2009/09/18/reflections-at-wicsa/comment-page-1/#comment-15268 Mark Staples » Blog Archive » Academic Academy Awards Fri, 25 Sep 2009 05:48:25 +0000 http://www.markstaples.com/?p=133#comment-15268 [...] about recent results.  Maybe that’s OK – I think the greatest value of conferences is networking and nuance, and you would still get that at a Computer Science discipline’s “Academy [...] [...] about recent results.  Maybe that’s OK – I think the greatest value of conferences is networking and nuance, and you would still get that at a Computer Science discipline’s “Academy [...]

]]> Comment on The Next Big Thing? by Mark http://www.markstaples.com/2009/08/26/the-next-big-thing/comment-page-1/#comment-15261 Mark Wed, 26 Aug 2009 20:50:09 +0000 http://www.markstaples.com/?p=118#comment-15261 I also think citemine is an exciting idea! I'm happy to forgive bugs in a "very beta" site - and I trust that because you've released early, that you'll release often! My questions about citemine are just that - questions. I'm not sure if being a zero-sum game is necessarily bad, and I'm not sure if being a pyramid/ponzi scheme is necessarily bad either. (Of course perhaps citemine is neither!) <a href="http://limingzhu.posterous.com/a-research-paper-ponzi-scheme" rel="nofollow">Liming is hoping</a> maybe it is a ponzi scheme and that he can get in early on it. :-) I like playing games, but when I'm learning to play a new game, I want to understand the ramifications of the ruleset. I also think citemine is an exciting idea! I’m happy to forgive bugs in a “very beta” site – and I trust that because you’ve released early, that you’ll release often!

My questions about citemine are just that – questions. I’m not sure if being a zero-sum game is necessarily bad, and I’m not sure if being a pyramid/ponzi scheme is necessarily bad either. (Of course perhaps citemine is neither!) Liming is hoping maybe it is a ponzi scheme and that he can get in early on it. :-)

I like playing games, but when I’m learning to play a new game, I want to understand the ramifications of the ruleset.

]]> Comment on The Next Big Thing? by Ricky http://www.markstaples.com/2009/08/26/the-next-big-thing/comment-page-1/#comment-15260 Ricky Wed, 26 Aug 2009 04:55:24 +0000 http://www.markstaples.com/?p=118#comment-15260 Hey Mark, thanks for blogging about Citemine. You're right, there are bugs, and many important features lacking. We're working on improving the site, and also formally proving some of the properties of this particular market (e.g., the "truthfulness" of the mechanism, in mechanism design parlance), and answering some of the questions you've posed. What's exciting for us is the excitement that scientists who are familiar with Citemine have expressed about the underlying idea. We've got to work a bit harder on the execution side, obviously. Hey Mark, thanks for blogging about Citemine. You’re right, there are bugs, and many important features lacking. We’re working on improving the site, and also formally proving some of the properties of this particular market (e.g., the “truthfulness” of the mechanism, in mechanism design parlance), and answering some of the questions you’ve posed. What’s exciting for us is the excitement that scientists who are familiar with Citemine have expressed about the underlying idea. We’ve got to work a bit harder on the execution side, obviously.

]]>