Palmtana wrote:Denorien wrote:Apologies for how this may read. Can the folks who sent emails paste the text here?
This was part of the point to the requirements exercise. If we're not presenting the request properly, it may seem to be more difficult than it needs to be or 'complaining' by the by the people who like to complain. Either perception / attitude makes it easy to ignore us.
Knowing most of the posters in this thread, I doubt that those who have written have grumbling as the focus of their message. Some who have contacted SOM have shared with me what they wrote. Their e-mails were thoughtful and fact-based. This thread contains posts from frustrated managers. But they are few. We'll keep the polite communication going with SOM and see where it leads.
That's good information and settles my concerns along those lines.
Yet, I still believe proper messaging is key for software / application feature development. A business case and requirements that are tied to use cases (which tell a story). I believe this post captures all of that. I summarized the requirements into six (A - F). The business case can also be brought together in a concise statement.
Palmtana, do you think that's been done, doesn't need to be done, doesn't matter either way? I didn't get any tweaking of the reqs from the audience. It could all be a waste of time. But, that's not my experience from other software and application development.