Adaptive Software Solutions

Bill Venners has started an interesting thread on software architecture and ROI at Artima . Here is my response to the posting: There are two forces that a software usually has to reckon with. Changes in business requirements and changes in technology. Let's say we build an ERP system. Some business rules in the accounting module might have to be modified due to changes in tax laws. Parhaps the client might want to produce more reports or change some existing ones. The client might want to change the UI. Brainstorming with domain experts and clients will most likely help us make a comprehensive (though not all-encompassing) list of requirements that can change in the next let's say three years. With some further thought we may also be able to attach a probablity of change. If we incorporate enough flexibility for high probablity changes then we will get a good return on investment on the architecture. I think this is the middle ground between an overly simplified architecture a

A few days back I was reading Bruce Eckels blog on Open Spaces. Open Spaces seems to a very broad (open) ended concept, but it can be a very interesting and powerful concept if the participants are mature enough to make proper use of it. Here is the broad outline of my understanding of Open Spaces: Open Spaces are conferences propelled by a concept or question. The driving concept could be anything from "How do we make our neighborhood cleaner" to "What is the best way to utilize web services". These are not preplanned conferences. The person or organization who wishes to explore a concept/problem will send out invitations in the community. People/companies who have similar interests will accept the invitation to attend. An invitation fee is usually charged to compensate for food, equipment, and conference room costs. The conference is a self organizing conference, which means there isn’t any pre-planned agenda. However the duration of the conference and time slot