Re: [tlug] Giving a program priority briefly

["Marty Pauley" <marty.pauley@example.com>]

On 24/07/07, Stephen J. Turnbull <stephen@example.com> wrote:
> Third parties (whether your successor or a court of law) need a
> *separate* statement of what the computer *should* do.  Otherwise they
> don't know whether what just bit you is a ferocious roach or your pet
> kabutomushi.

Unfortunately Stephen is correct.  I prefer the Extreme Programming
method advocated by Curt, and it does work well when the customer
cooperates.  But you need something else for when that goes wrong.
I've been in the court of law, and the judge knows that developers
need a spec to write code, in the same way that a builder needs plans.
(You can argue that he may be misunderstanding the situation,or just
be a bit behind the times, but he is still the judge).

So, if you really want to follow the agile approach and avoid any
trace of an up-front spec, you need to have a contract that says the
customer will formally accept software from you at the end of each
iteration, and pay you for it *before* you commence the next step.
Then, when things go wrong, you only lose the money for the last step,
not the whole project.

--
Marty