Re: Java Batch

<docdwarf@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:fvsi79$iae$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> In article <68duetF2ritg7U1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
> Pete Dashwood <dashwood@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>
>>
>>"chuck" <charles.leviton@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>news:b771707f-7b70-4d26-a01d-ccd21d0e6ef5@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> On May 5, 11:22 pm, Robert <n...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 5 May 2008 10:30:13 -0700 (PDT), Pakku <pa...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>>> wrote:
>><snip>
>>>
>>> But attempts at conversions get bogged down with changed business
>>> specifications.  As soon as system users hear there is going to be a
>>> conversion they want all these new requirements to be incor****ated-
>>> kind of like "While you are  in there making this change, why not make
>>> this additional teensy change as well" that most programmers know
>>> about!
>>
>>Yeah, users are the pits... Always wanting something, never satisified.
>
> Mr Dashwood, consider the following:
>
> Given that a cor****ation has finite resources then how are user changes
> (which consume resources) to be co-ordinated and allocated in a manner
> which is not reflective of 'the squeakiest wheel' and which is most
> profitable to the organisation?

It's easy. Change the way you develop stuff. Take a look at Active 
methodology. (Both IBM and MicroSoft have recently...)

Pete.
-- 
"I used to write COBOL...now I can do anything."