<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Software Architects</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.taylor.se/blog/2006/11/07/software-architects/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.taylor.se/blog/2006/11/07/software-architects/</link>
	<description>Smart consulting</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 08 Jun 2010 05:02:39 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Arnon Rotem-Gal-Oz</title>
		<link>http://www.taylor.se/blog/2006/11/07/software-architects/comment-page-1/#comment-7471</link>
		<dc:creator>Arnon Rotem-Gal-Oz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Mar 2007 09:25:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.taylor.se/blog/2006/11/07/software-architects/#comment-7471</guid>
		<description>The fact that the Wikipedia definition is not very good does not mean that the profession is not needed.
I also agree that the building architect methaphor is problematic 
Nevertheless, it is my experience that on large systems and even medium you need someone or someones that spend the time thinking about the big picture, understand and handle the different stakeholders and stike a ballance between all the desired quality attributes, partition the system into smaller components and help others make sure their design stays alighned with the overall goals of the system

This doesn&#039;t mean that, for example, to help others make surre their design is good the architect doesn&#039;t have to pair program with the developers - Architects can&#039;t be disconnected from technology etc. - but they are still needed.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The fact that the Wikipedia definition is not very good does not mean that the profession is not needed.<br />
I also agree that the building architect methaphor is problematic<br />
Nevertheless, it is my experience that on large systems and even medium you need someone or someones that spend the time thinking about the big picture, understand and handle the different stakeholders and stike a ballance between all the desired quality attributes, partition the system into smaller components and help others make sure their design stays alighned with the overall goals of the system</p>
<p>This doesn&#8217;t mean that, for example, to help others make surre their design is good the architect doesn&#8217;t have to pair program with the developers &#8211; Architects can&#8217;t be disconnected from technology etc. &#8211; but they are still needed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andres</title>
		<link>http://www.taylor.se/blog/2006/11/07/software-architects/comment-page-1/#comment-2039</link>
		<dc:creator>Andres</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Nov 2006 10:00:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.taylor.se/blog/2006/11/07/software-architects/#comment-2039</guid>
		<description>Kerry: Yeah, I&#039;ve read the article. Just like Martin says, it&#039;s an overloaded word, and unfortunately missused more than not, which is why I think that it should be scrapped.

Marcus: Actually, your post was one of the things itching in the back of my mind when I wrote this. You say that we need good architects, but I&#039;m still not clear what an architect is or does.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Kerry: Yeah, I&#8217;ve read the article. Just like Martin says, it&#8217;s an overloaded word, and unfortunately missused more than not, which is why I think that it should be scrapped.</p>
<p>Marcus: Actually, your post was one of the things itching in the back of my mind when I wrote this. You say that we need good architects, but I&#8217;m still not clear what an architect is or does.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Marcus Widerberg</title>
		<link>http://www.taylor.se/blog/2006/11/07/software-architects/comment-page-1/#comment-1740</link>
		<dc:creator>Marcus Widerberg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 11 Nov 2006 14:12:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.taylor.se/blog/2006/11/07/software-architects/#comment-1740</guid>
		<description>architects are domain experts that the org. can&#039;t get rid of, and since they don&#039;t code any longer, they can&#039;t be allowed commit status any more...

I assumed you read my incomplete but a bit more PC recount here:

http://mawi.org/ArchitectsAndSoftwareDevelopment.aspx</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>architects are domain experts that the org. can&#8217;t get rid of, and since they don&#8217;t code any longer, they can&#8217;t be allowed commit status any more&#8230;</p>
<p>I assumed you read my incomplete but a bit more PC recount here:</p>
<p><a href="http://mawi.org/ArchitectsAndSoftwareDevelopment.aspx" rel="nofollow">http://mawi.org/ArchitectsAndSoftwareDevelopment.aspx</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kerry Buckley</title>
		<link>http://www.taylor.se/blog/2006/11/07/software-architects/comment-page-1/#comment-1679</link>
		<dc:creator>Kerry Buckley</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Nov 2006 22:14:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.taylor.se/blog/2006/11/07/software-architects/#comment-1679</guid>
		<description>Agree 100%. The closest thing to an &#039;architect&#039; on an agile team is probably a senior developer who coaches and guides others in the team (for instance while pairing, or just by keeping an ear open when other pairs are discussing how best to implement someting).

I assume you&#039;ve read &lt;a href=&quot;http://martinfowler.com/ieeeSoftware/whoNeedsArchitect.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Martin Fowler&#039;s article&lt;/a&gt; in a similar vein?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Agree 100%. The closest thing to an &#8216;architect&#8217; on an agile team is probably a senior developer who coaches and guides others in the team (for instance while pairing, or just by keeping an ear open when other pairs are discussing how best to implement someting).</p>
<p>I assume you&#8217;ve read <a href="http://martinfowler.com/ieeeSoftware/whoNeedsArchitect.pdf" rel="nofollow">Martin Fowler&#8217;s article</a> in a similar vein?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris Hedgate</title>
		<link>http://www.taylor.se/blog/2006/11/07/software-architects/comment-page-1/#comment-1631</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris Hedgate</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Nov 2006 18:45:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.taylor.se/blog/2006/11/07/software-architects/#comment-1631</guid>
		<description>As Fred Brooks wrote in No Silver Bullet back in 1987, the building construction metaphor has outlived it&#039;s usefulness. Software is not built, it is grown. Weird that it has not done more difference than it has for almost 20 years now..</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As Fred Brooks wrote in No Silver Bullet back in 1987, the building construction metaphor has outlived it&#8217;s usefulness. Software is not built, it is grown. Weird that it has not done more difference than it has for almost 20 years now..</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
