Architecting is not just about adding, is also about removing. Let me explain with an example we are all familiar with: in "Platoon", when the troops arrived at Vietnam, Sgts. Elias and Barns welcomed the newcomers getting rid of a bunch of equipment they didn't need. The soldiers were just over-architected, and they didn't know why.
Sometimes we need to strip a lot of "gear" from systems we welcome. Thought the main drive for this removing is to guarantee the agility of the projects, I often identify the following pattern:
- a need was identified, and an architectural decisions was taken based on that need;
- the architect identified some architectural patterns based on that need, but doesn't identify the need itself;
- the architect leaves the team, but the patterns and practices are kept;
- people enter and leave the team, maintaining the patterns and practices without knowing why;
- the need is no longer valid, but the architectural grounds the application is built upon are kept;
Isn't it strange how people work?
1 comment:
I coudn't agree more with you. In the consulting business that seems to be a growing problem. Everyone likes their application or system and everyones wants another one.
Everyday you have to think twice: Do I need this?
Post a Comment