| Resolved Traditional methodologists are a bunch of process-dependent stick-in-the-muds who'd rather produce flawless documentation than a working system that meets business needs. Rebuttal Lightweight, er, "agile" methodologists are a bunch of glorified hackers who are going to be in for a heck of a surprise when they try to scale up their "toys" into enterprise-level software. | "Today, a new debate rages: agile software development versus rigorous software development." Jim Highsmith, Guest Editor Opening Statement Agile Software Development Joins the "Would-Be" Crowd The Bogus War A Resounding "Yes" to Agile Processes -- But Also to More Agile or Rigorous OO Methodologies: Getting the Best of Both Worlds Big and Agile? | |
| Next Issue Is Risk Management Going the Way of Disco? Guest Editor: Bob Charette Risk management is a white-hot topic. It is hard to pick up a magazine or newspaper that doesn't have a story with the word "risk" spread from title to last paragraph. But as risk management becomes more popular, will it go the way of previous good ideas -- from fashion, to fad, and then trash heap? Do the debates over the definition of risk signal risk management's good health or impending demise? Tune in next month as we debate whether risk management is doomed or here to stay. | ||
Is the RUP really "rich and light"? Can a self-described "spy" in the house of agile turn double agent? And why would one of the agile movement's foremost proponents confess that "agility shows up in the execution -- or it doesn't"? In the January 2002 issue, we continue our methodologies debate with articles by such luminaries as Ivar Jacobson, Stephen Mellor, and Alistair Cockburn.
