Category Archives: Computing

Articles about computers and the IT industry.

Software Project Survival Guide

Introduction

For many people here, writing software is, if not a job, then a hobby. Our enthusiasm is a double-edged sword. Our technical knowledge is usually much greater than people who just develop software for a living. This sounds like a big advantage, but it’s not as large as you would have thought.

Let’s have a look in ‘Software Project Survival Guide’ (SPSG) to see what Steve McConnell, famed author of ‘Code Complete’ and ‘Rapid Development,’ has to say on the subject.

The most relevant bit I can find is in chapter two. It’s a project survival test. Out of thirty-three questions, only one (28: “Does the project team have all the technical expertise needed to complete the project?”) is directly related to our ability to effectively code.

That can’t be right, can it?

Content

While you’re still reeling over the consequences of that last paragraph, I’ll slip in some of the dull things that the book has to cover and finish with some of the more glamorous stuff at the end when you’re brain is back in gear.

Some of the most important stuff is ‘management.’ Whether it’s planning, quality assurance, tracking what’s been developed so far or checking on the number of defects, it’s not the ‘techies’ that are the most important.

At first this comes as a shock, but the more you think about it, the more it makes sense. Unless you know what’s going wrong, you can’t fix it. Unless the complete design is documented a team can’t effectively write the software quickly.

Think about Linux kernel development. It obviously work well, but it’s not terribly optimal. The same bug might get fixed several times and there’s not a huge amount of up to date documentation so people have to dive in at the code. For free software this works fine — since the time is usually free, but if you have deadlines and are under contract to deliver a working product on time you’re going to lose a lot of money.

Good bits

McConnell takes the three hundred pages to explain these past two paragraphs in detail. It sounds very dull, but he has a clear, friendly style that makes it, if not entertaining, then not as dull as it might have been.

He splits the project into stages, explains in broad terms what they are and documents each one in more detail in the later chapters. It’s all very clear and logical leaving you in no doubt what stage you’re currently at and what you should be doing for the successful execution of it.

Bad bits

‘Code Complete’ is a book that just about everyone that writes computer programs should read. ‘Software Project Survival Guide’ does not fall into the same category. The book should be read by “anyone who has a stake in a software project’s outcome” according to the preface, but that is only accurate once you define the type of project it covers.

To cut a long story short, if you write software professionally you should read it. It’s probably more use to managers and team leaders, but you can be a better developer if you know the kind of things that need to be done. Besides, almost everyone will be in charge of people at one point and will need a broader picture than merely what the other modules do. (Well where I work that’s true, anyway.)

It covers projects that have a customer whether that’s an internal customer, an external client or people that buy shrink-wrapped software. What it doesn’t cover are software projects like Linux, massive sprawling projects developed because someone is interested in doing it. This is not unreasonable. Half the challenge in a ‘normal’ project is tracking whether you’re running to schedule. If you don’t have a schedule and cost target it doesn’t matter. However, maybe we could take a few hints from the book to ‘streamline’ the process.

Overall

Steve McConnell has done it again. I don’t think that it will go down as a classic like ‘Code Complete,’ but SPSG is an indispensable book for any developer that has any interest in the process and not just lines of code.

The facts

Author: Steve McConnell

Cost: ?22.49

ISBN: 1-57231-621-7

Buy this book from Amazon.com of from Amazon.co.uk.

Engineer or Hacker?

Eric Raymond would have us believe that everyone that develops software for fun is a hacker. I know that historically this has always been the case, but that doesn’t necessarily make it the right thing. All good, and bad, things come to an end.

I doubt that it will happen any time soon, but I think that ‘hacker’ is a term that should whither and die.

The first problem, and this is the obvious one, is the public perception of it. Yes we all know that hackers write code while crackers break into computer systems, but how many people ‘outside’ know that? How many professional software developers, i.e., those who do it just for a living rather than for fun, know that?

If even professionals don’t know the difference, how can the rest of the population have a chance?

Of course there’s always the fanatical wing, those that claim that we should hit the problem face-on. We should call ourselves hackers because we know that we’re right and that everyone else is wrong.

It’s actually a very politically correct way of doing things, but I remain unconvinced that it works. Richard Stallman continues to insist on the term ‘free software,’ even though most people find it more confusing than ‘Open Source.’ None of this is about changing ideals or opinions, it’s just about the correct marketing of the term.

The second problem I identified is much more subtle. What does the term ‘hacker’ mean? My dictionary defines it as follows:

hackvt cut, chop (at) violently;

It goes on, but that’s the important part. My objection comes from the lack of precision that the term implies. You get a program and violently cut and chop it around until, by chance, you get something out at the end that seems to work okay.

I hope you don’t develop software like that, I certainly don’t. Any half-decent developer follows a process, no matter how ill-documented. When you debug software you don’t just dive in adding ‘print’ statements all over the place, guessing where it goes wrong. Instead you make a hypothesis and test, modifying your original until you get a good idea what’s wrong, then you start with the ‘print’ commands or your debugger.

Does that sound uncontrolled and violent?

All that planning and precision, all the experience that it takes to be able to make a reasonable and accurate hypothesis sounds more like engineering of some kind.

And that it why I call myself a Software Engineer rather than a hacker, even when I write code in my spare time.

Open Sources

Introduction

This is a very strange book by almost any criteria. Firstly, much of the content is available on the web in one form or another. This includes an appendix which is literally a Usenet discussion printed. Secondly, most of the writers are techies first and writers second. You don’t get that kind of admission from most writers, even when it’s obviously true.

Content

There are fifteen essays by eighteen writers. I’m not going to go through all of them, but I shall note some of the highlights.

The style prize, without doubt, goes to Larry Wall for ‘Diligence, Patience, and Humility.’ It’s one of the longer essays, has dozens of useless-looking diagrams and for much of the time seems to go nowhere. You keep reading, though. You may not see where it’s going, but you’re intrigued. And it’s worth it — despite initial appearances, it does go somewhere!

As a Linux-biased web site, I couldn’t miss out Linus Torvalds piece, ‘The Linux Edge.’ His simple message — Linux has survived by having a good design — is thoroughly investigated, but the best bit is that he criticises just about everyone else in the industry, often without much justification, and still comes out the other end smelling of roses! I’m not sure how he did it, but I know I’d hate Bill Gates more if he said pretty much the same things.

As always he comes across as very modest, and attributes many of the good ideas to other people.

I liked Marshall Kirk McKusick’s potted history of Unix too. I think I’ve seen much of that before, but not in one place.

Since he practically started the whole thing, I need to mention Richard Stallmans ‘The GNU Operating System and the Free Software Movement.’ It’s an interesting piece in that he contradicts some of what the other authors in the book have to say (as has been well documented, he dislikes that phrase ‘Open Source’ and demands that people call it ‘free’ software). It’s clear that he knows exactly what he wants and where he wants to go, but it’s equally clear that he’s going to put a lot of businesses off free software if he keeps going the way he is. RMS, I respect what you’re saying, but calm down!

The final mention goes to the two Eric Raymond essays. Raymond has been at the centre of the Open Source movement since the Cathedral and the Bazaar,’ and fully deserves the opportunity to write two pieces in Open Sources. The first piece ‘A Brief History of Hackerdom,’ describes the key points and people that gave rise to our current position. The second, ‘The Revenge of the Hackers,’ looks to the future.

Like much Raymond stuff, some is ‘personal’ and has a number of anecdotes about himself. It seems that many people hate this, but I feel that where it doesn’t get in the way of the message and while it’s still interesting and well written, it’s fine. The two essays are, indeed, fine.

Overall

I can’t really criticise this book. All the people in it are more influential than myself, better developers than myself, better writers than myself or, more commonly, all of the above. So while I like some of the writer more than others, and while I actually disagree with some of the assertions made, it is, at least, well written and thought provoking.

As a book intended to document the new-found popularity of the Open Source model, the book is a classic and a must-buy.

The facts

Author: Edited by Chris DiBona, Sam Ockman and Mark Stone

Cost: US$24.95

ISBN: 1-56592-582-3

Buy this book from Amazon.com or from Amazon.co.uk.

Accidental Empires: How the boys in Silicon Valley…

Introduction

This is neither a new book nor a new purchase for me, so why am I reviewing it? Bottom line: it’s a book that I’ve enjoyed a lot over the years and one that I feel the need to recommend to as many people as possible.

What’s in it?

The obvious format for a book on the personal computer industry would be chronological, but as he points out early on in the book, things just aren’t that simple. Instead he uses what, on paper, might look to be a random arrangment of anecdotes, jumping from Apple to Xerox Parc to Microsoft and IBM in the matter of a few pages. But that’s just the nature of the beast.

What’s good

Cringelys writing is easy and engaging to read. It would be very tempting to just sit down and read the entire book from beginning to end. It’s friendly, chatty and full of interesting little anecdotes about all the main characters, from Bill Gates to Steve Jobs.

He freely admits that he’s not been a true historian. He’s missed out some arguably important stuff, but it would take a long, dull book to get all that information in. The charm of Accidental Empires is the fact that it’s easy to read.

Conclusion

When I do reviews, I normally have a section on the bad stuff. I don’t have one here. That’s not because the book is flawless, but because it achieves perfectly what it set out to do.

If you’re at all interested in how the PC industry came to be, this is the book for you.

The facts

Author: Robert X. Cringely

Cost: ?6.99

ISBN: 0887308554

Oracle Builtin Packages

Introduction
Steven Feuerstein’s ‘Oracle PL/SQL Programming‘ book has, over the last couple of years, become my bible on the subject of writing sizable Oracle PL/SQL programs. As I said in my review, it’s useful because it covers just about everything, including the things that don’t work.

So if that book covers just about everything, why would anyone want to buy ‘Oracle Builtin Packages’?

Content

In fact, as the first chapter of the book explains, this entire book was origianlly chapter 15 of ‘PL/SQL Programming’ but Oracle complicated things by adding more to the PL/SQL programming language (all the pseudo-object oriented stuff in version 8 ) and many more new or enhanced packages. The result: either a single two thousand page monster, or two more reasonably sized tomes.

But like the first book, this is still a bit of a monster in its own right. It stands at 931 pages and there’s very little padding; if only all technical books had such a high signal-to-noise ratio!

It seems rather pointless to go into detail on the content of all the different sections…

The two chapters that I’ve used the most are those on DBMS_FILE, which allows you to manipulate operating system files, and DBMS_SQL. Just about everything I know about these modules I learned from this book. When I was originally writing the code, ‘Oracle Builtin Packages’ was by my side, open at the relevant page. When colleagues mistakenly thought I knew what I was talking about, this book was open beneath my desk giving me superiour bluffing ability.

The main critisism that I can think of is that some of the material is getting rather out of date. The DBMS_SQL package is no longer as necesary as it used to be — Oracle 8i introduced some new syntax to the PL/SQL language that largely replaces it.

Conclusion

I’ll be brutal: in marked contrast to Feuerstein’s first book, if you regularly write PL/SQL code you can get by without reading this book.

But you will be more productive if you get it. You won’t be spending days writing code to do things that Oracle have kindly supplied a routine to do and you won’t give up on PL/SQL and write a program in Pro*C because you don’t realise, for example, that you can manipulate files.

No, this book is less vital than ‘Oracle PL/SQL Programming’ but it is still a thorough, well organised and useful book. It’ll quickly pay for itself many times over, and that’s a very high recommendation.

The facts

Author: Steven Feuerstein, Charles Dye, John Beresniewicz

Cost: US$46.95

ISBN: 1-56592-375-8

What About Free Documentation?

Introduction

There’s a lot of free or open source software on the net, and much been written about both that software and the process that drives it. Eric Raymond, of course, is currently the main anthropologist although Steven Levy beat him to it and there are many others.

There is also a significant amount of free documentation. One only needs to take a look at the GNU web site (their definition of a free operating system includes free documentation) or the Linux Documentation Project to see that. However, there doesn’t seem to have been a “Cathedral and the Bazaar” for free documentation, or even anything similar.

That’s kind of what I want to do here, but I’m not going to go into as much detail. Instead, I’m going to write about my own experience writing free documentation (my Oracle 8i Installation Howto), the trial and tribulations, the ups and downs, the good times and the bad… You get the idea.

Starting off

I guess the first thing to note is that I didn’t write the HOWTO to ‘scratch an itch’ — I already knew how to install Oracle! Instead, I noticed that many people were having difficulties and that I was spending quite some time replying to the same questions on newsgroups and Oracle Technet. You could say that I wrote the document in order to be just as helpful but without being quite so intensive on my time! (So my itch could have been to save time.)

Another motivator was ‘to put something back into the community.’ Sounds a little pretentious, but it’s true. I’ve been using Linux since 1994 and, although an able developer, have never contributed any code to any free software. This was my chance! I suppose I naively thought that writing English would also take less time than C. As we’ll see later, that didn’t turn out to be the case.

I think that this is an important difference between free software and free documentation. No-one will ever write free documentation to “scratch an itch” (as Eric Raymond so eloquently put it). This takes away, quite possibly, the greatest incentive to create something and may explain why, generally speaking, text is very much a second class citizen to code.

Release early; release often

The first decision I really needed to make was tools to use. My first thought was to add a few new pages to the web site that you’re currently reading. And then I got lazy. I decided to base my new work on the then current Oracle HOWTO, which meant that I had to get to grips with SGML and the SGML-Tools programs. At this point I wasn’t thinking in terms of getting it into the Linux Documentation Project, I just wanted to get a head-start. Once I’d actually started, it didn’t take me long to figure out that the structure of the old document didn’t match what I needed and, more or less, started again from scratch. I did, however, keep the same tools.

Having just read the Cathedral and the Bazaar, I consciously decided to issue my document before it was complete. I quickly wrote the introduction, prerequisites and installation sections and added a number of place-holders for the remaining sections. I then announced it in a message to Oracle Technet and a couple of newgroups.

Very quickly I got some excellent feedback. People were asking for clarifications and new questions, and others were pointing out factual errors. As with software, I quickly added these fixes and thanked the contributers both by email and in the document itself.

I was very pleased that this approach worked. Normally I would have ‘finished’ my work before making any issue, but by releasing early I was able to help more people early on and elicit — I’m guessing here — more useful comments. (I figure that’s true because I think I’d be less inclined to contribute to a finished document than a work-in-progress.)

Maintenance

Around version 1.5, a couple of weeks after my initial release, it was more-or-less complete. All sections were filled in and I managed to complete a successful installation just by following the steps I’d written about.

The first issue was the people didn’t follow my advice — how dare they! Oracle is a big and complicated application and, even on Solaris, you just don’t change things unless you have to and you always use a ‘certified’ operating system. This is an alien mind-set to many Linux developers, who tend to thing “newer is better” and is not helped by all the weird and wonderful devices that you can connect to an Intel-based PC.

The first questions I received that deliberately weren’t answered in the HOWTO were problems with different distributions. People were trying to get Oracle running on just about anything with a Linux kernel!

I didn’t fancy wiping my PC clean and attempting the install with as many different distributions as I could find, I just didn’t have the time. Fortunately, the same community on the Internet that helped me complete my first version added to my knowledge base.

I started to add more and more detail to the HOWTO. If you’re using RH6 do this, with Debian do that… It seriously affected the “flow” of the document for everyone. Given my Oracle (conservative) background, this is just not a problem I originally considered.

When Oracle released 8.1.6 I made the decision that the HOWTO was for RH6 and Oracle 8i R1. It would make the occasional nod to later releases of both the database and the distribution, but fundamentally the focus would be on one version of Oracle and one version of Linux.

As a kind of half-way-house, I started to add extra pages to my website detailing some of the idiosyncrasies of different Linux distributions or newer versions of Oracle. I’m still not completely happy with this approach but I’ve not heard of a better solution yet.

Feedback

Having “completed” my document, what keeps me editing? If I’m writing software, my motivation is adding cool new features. Or maybe adding new stuff for other people and waiting for their praise?

As I mentioned earlier, things are very different for documentation writers.

I’ve got an awful lot of mail about Oracle and Linux since late 1999 when I first published the HOWTO. The email I get seems to have gone through a number of phases. When I first issued the document, I got an almost fifty-fifty split between “thank yous” and suggestions for improvement. Almost all was positive, constructive and friendly.

Without it I would almost certainly have stopped writing. At this point I suppose my motivation was to increase the ratio of thanks to suggestions. I turned a stream of emails into a challenge!

As the HOWTO started to get into wide circulation, the number of helpful suggestions started to drop and the number of questions started to rise dramatically. Some I saw as suggestions as I didn’t cover those details, but most were just from people who clearly couldn’t be bothered to read any further than the front page and my email address.

I can’t count the number of messages I’ve received saying “it didn’t work, what should I do?” (in as many words). How should I reply to that without being rude?! I’ve also received emails from people giving me their “root” password and other confidential details.

The next stage was when Oracle released a newer version and RedHat decided to go with a new version of GLIBC for version 7 of their distribution.

By this point, my motivation was mainly trying to reduce the number of messages I was receiving. Sure, I felt like being rude but I rarely was. I tried to answer all the most common questions in the document, but this point was definitely the low point. Although the updates were helpful, I was doing them for the “wrong” reasons, and the number of messages saying “thanks” had dropped to virtually zero.

More recently I’m only getting the occasional question. It’s difficult to know whether that’s because my HOWTO covers just about everything it needs to or because I’m just not promoting it as much as I used to or because the cutting edge in Oracle is now with 9i. Or maybe I was rude and people are too scared to talk to me..?

In conclusion…

If my original intention was to save time, it failed miserably. I’ve spend even more time replying to emails and maintaining the document than I would have done occasionally adding comments to discussion groups.

Towards the end of this piece I’m sounding very negative, but that’s a bad way to finish as generally speaking it has been very enjoyable. Getting a Linux distribution with your work on is quite a buzz and it’s always nice to get a friendly message or offers of free CDs and books from strangers.