Re: Waterfall vs. Spiral development and doc (was: RE: Why is working from a spec like walking on water?)

["Skip Mendler" <wmendler -at- cornetltd -dot- com>]

-----Original Message-----
From: Janet_Swisher -at- trilogy -dot- com <Janet_Swisher -at- trilogy -dot- com>
To: TECHWR-L <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Tuesday, November 16, 1999 8:31 PM
Subject: Waterfall vs. Spiral development and doc (was: RE: Why is working
from a spec like walking on water?)


><snippage>

>The two development models you are referring to are commonly called the
>"waterfall" and the "spiral".  In the waterfall model, everything
>"cascades" from one phase to the next, and there is no going "uphill".  In
>the spiral model, the phases of development (requirements analysis,
>design, development, testing, etc.) are seen as a cycle, where the
>functionality and quality of the product are built up incrementally each
>time through the cycle, and each phase may be visited multiple times.
>


We should not forget the hybrid of these methods, where you try to develop
cascading down from the spec, only to find that the spec was insufficient or
got changed at the last moment without you being notified and you have to go
back -- and then the more times you go around, the faster things go, the
deeper you get and the fewer options you have.

I am, of course, referring to the "whirlpool" model...

//skip