Panels
Chair: Steven D. Fraser,
Independent Consultant, sdfraser@acm.org
OOPSLA panels are lively, participatory, educational, and entertaining. They offer an interactive opportunity to share perspectives,
debate opinions, and communicate best-practices. Part of the enduring appeal of OOPSLA panels is to showcase the opinions
of leading researchers and industry experts.
|

|
Tuesday, 28 October
Wednesday, 29 October
Thursday, 30 October
Meeting the Challenge of Software Engineering Education for Working Professionals in the 21st Century
Tuesday, 28 October
10:30-12:00
Steven Fraser (Chair),
Independent Consultant,
sdfraser@acm.org Ray Bareiss,
CMU (West),
bareiss@cs.cmu.edu Barry Boehm,
USC,
boehm@cse.usc.edu Mark Hayes,
Microsoft,
mahayes@microsoft.com Laura Hill,
Sun Microsystems,
laura.hill@sun.com Gabby Silberman,
IBM,
gabbys@us.ibm.com Dave Thomas,
Bedarra Research Labs,
dave@bedarra.com
|
|
Software engineering education for working professionals remains a challenge from the perspective of determining relevant
content; identifying effective methods for delivery; and maintaining the focus and motivation of students. This panel brings
together academic and industry professionals to share their perspectives and experiences. Anticipated points for discussion
include: education/training delivery strategies, curriculum definition, marketing issues, collaboration strategies to engage
industry sponsorship, value assessments for students and sponsoring organizations, and program success stories. This will
be a highly interactive panel and the audience should come prepared to both ask and answer questions.
Xtreme Programming and Agile Coaching
Tuesday, 28 October
15:30-17:00
Steven Fraser (Impresario),
Independent Consultant,
sdfraser@acm.org Rachel Reinitz (Chair),
IBM,
rreinitz@us.ibm.com Jutta Eckstein,
Independent Consultant,
jutta@jeckstein.com Joshua Kerievsky,
Industrial Logic,
joshua@industriallogic.com Rob Mee,
Pivotal Computer Systems,
robmee@ieee.org Mary Poppendieck,
Agile Alliance,
mary@poppendieck.com
|
|
This panel brings together coaches to discuss all aspects of the practice: how to become a coach,
choosing a coach, and describing what is to be an (in) effective coach. A coach watches, provides
feedback, and suggests subtle direction. The coach may be more—for example—an architect
or team lead—but that is a matter for debate. This session will be run as a panel with two open
"fish bowl" seats, only one of which may be occupied by audience members at any one time. The
panelists will defend their positions and offer feedback. Panelists were asked to offer their observations
on three questions: How did YOU become a coach? What's the toughest thing you've had to do as a coach?
What's your advice for teams looking for a coach?
Discipline and Practices of TDD (Test Driven Development)
Wednesday, 29 October
10:30-12:00
Steven Fraser (Chair),
Independent Consultant,
sdfraser@acm.org Dave Astels,
Adaption Software,
dave@adaptionsoft.com Kent Beck,
Three Rivers Institute,
kent@threeriversinstitute.org Barry Boehm,
USC,
boehm@cse.usc.edu John McGregor,
Clemson University,
johnmc@cs.clemson.edu James Newkirk,
Microsoft,
jamesnew@microsoft.com Charlie Poole,
Poole Consulting,
poole@pooleconsulting.com
|
|
This panel brings together practitioners with experience in Agile and XP methodologies to discuss
the approaches and benefits of applying Test Driven Development (TDD). The goal of TDD is clean
code that works. The mantra of TDD is: write a test; make it run; and make it right. Open questions
to be addressed by the panel include:
- How are TDD approaches to be applied to databases, GUIs, and distributed systems?
- What are the quantitative benchmarks that can demonstrate the value of TDD, and
- What are the best approaches to solve the ubiquitous issue of scalability?
Innovate!
Wednesday, 29 October
13:30-15:00
Laura Hill (Chair),
Sun Microsystems, Inc.,
laura.hill@sun.com Rachel Davies,
Amarinda,
rachel@amarinda.com Dick Gabriel,
Sun Microsystems, Inc.,
rpg@dreamsongs.com Harlan Sexton,
Oracle Corp,
hsexton@oracle.com Kevin Tyson,
Independent Consultant,
kptyson@earthlink.net David West,
New Mexico Highlands University and University of New Mexico,
dwest@cs.nmhu.edu
|
|
Freedom to innovate is one of the key motivators for many technical workers. Unfortunately, although
innovation is often trumpeted as a key company attribute, it seems that many organizations struggle
to provide the necessary environment—even those organizations whose original claim to fame lay
in their ability to innovate. This panel will look at the barriers to innovation that occur in a variety
of environments: large, well-established organizations, start-ups, academia, standards bodies and the
open source community. Panelists will propose a set of technical and non-technical techniques that can
be used to foster innovation in even the most lethargic or hostile environment.
Model Driven Architecture: How far have we come, how far can we go?
Wednesday, 29 October
15:30-17:00
Granville Miller (Chair),
Borland,
Randy.Miller@borland.com Andy Evans,
Xactium Limited,
andy.evans@xactium.com Ivar Jacobson,
JacZone,
ivar@jaczone.com Henrik Jondel,
Borland,
henrik.jondel@borland.com Allan Kennedy,
Kennedy Carter,
allan.kennedy@kc.com Stephen Mellor,
Project Technology,
steve@executableumlbook.com Dave Thomas,
Bedarra Research Labs,
dave@bedarra.com
|
|
Model Driven Architecture (MDA) is a technology that has been in the process of evolution for many years. Today, many vendors
are now producing products that support MDA. We are hearing more and more success stories that indicate that this technology
is the "real deal". But, with the failed promises of CASE in the late 1980's, many people still have questions about how much
of an application can be generated from models and constraint languages. Is MDA really capable of generating enterprise applications?
What are the technologies are available to implement MDA?
Here is your opportunity to ask the experts the questions that are necessary to convince you of the validity of this new technology.
Each of these panelists has been intricately involved in building the underlying foundations of Model Driven Architecture
and its implementation.
Agile Management—An Oxymoron?
Thursday, 30 October
8:30-10:00
Lougie Anderson (Chair),
Sabrix, Inc.,
lougie@sabrix.com Glen Alleman,
CH2M Hill,
glen.alleman@rfets.gov Kent Beck,
Three Rivers Institute,
kent@threeriversinstitute.com Joe Blotner,
Sabrix, Inc.,
joeb@sabrix.com Ward Cunningham,
Cunningham & Cunningham,
ward@c2.com Mary Poppendieck,
Poppendieck, LLC,
mary@poppendieck.com Rebecca Wirfs-Brock,
Wirfs-Brock Associates,
rebecca@wirfs-brock.com
|
|
"Self-directed team" is one of the mantras of Agile Methodologies. Self-direction means that the team's manager
is relegated to a facilitator role with little or no influence over day-to-day activities. For example,
Kent Beck has written that the manager of an XP project can do four things: ask for estimates on cost and
results, move people around among projects, ask for status reports, and cancel the project. Agile literature
in general says that managers shouldn't be directly involved in analysis, design, coding, testing or integration.
They may (but only occasionally!) facilitate the process between the customer and the developers; and it would
be nice if they provided food and toys to keep the team happy. It appears, then, that the agile manger is
expected to hover on the fringes of a project asking a few questions and throwing in goodies—but with ultimate
power (cancellation) in her hip pocket. This scenario makes one wonder. Do managers really matter to the
success of an agile project? Are they superfluous? What happens when managers step over the prescribed
line—does it mean that the end of Agile Methodology as we know it and as handed down by the Agile Manifesto?
The panel will explore this ticklish terrain by answering the following questions: Why Agile Methods and managers
don't mix. Or do they? What can/should managers do in an agile environment? Under what conditions are managers
an absolute requirement in an agile environment? (e.g. Government applications?) Do good management techniques
apply to both Agile and non-Agile environments? Is management a dead-end profession in an Agile world?
Object-Oriented Success Stories: "Learning from our Failures"
Thursday, 30 October
10:30-12:00
Joseph Yoder (Chair),
The Refactory Inc. & The University of Illinois,
joeyoder@joeyoder.com Ralph Johnson,
The Refactory Inc. & The University of Illinois,
johnson@cs.uiuc.edu Steven Wingo,
Southern Company,
RSWingo@southernco.com Ron Jeffries,
XProgramming.com,
ronjeffries@acm.org Linda Rising,
Independent Consultant,
risingl@acm.org
|
|
Beneath the buzz around methodologies, languages and technologies, the last eighteen years at OOPSLA have seen countless object-oriented
success stories, large and small. This fishbowl will provide OOPSLA attendees to bear witness to these victories, and tell
these tales at last. Similarly we propose a follow-up fishbowl that discusses our failures. Just as much (if not more) can
be learned from failures as can from successes.
Panel: Reuse Repositories and ReuseThe Realities
Thursday, 30 October
10:30-12:00
|
|
This session starts with a photo-essay on components, reuse, value,
and beauty, and concludes with a panel on libraries, repositories, and reuse.
Without a Name: A Reusable Component Repository
Robert Biddle,
Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand,
robert@mcs.vuw.ac.nz Angela Martin,
Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand,
angela@mcs.vuw.ac.nz James Noble,
Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand,
kjx@mcs.vuw.ac.nz
The Story - this essay concerns components, reuse, value, and
beauty. All photographs were taken at No Name Building Recyclers, Wellington,
New Zealand, with the kind permission of the owners.
|
Panel: Reuse Repositories and ReuseThe Realities
Dave Thomas,
Bedarra Research Labs & Carleton University,
dave@bedarra.com Brian Barry,
Bedarra Corp & eclipse.org,
brian@bedarra.com Ivar Jacobson,
JacZone,
ivar@jaczone.com Linda Northrop,
Software Engineering Institute,
lmn@sei.cmu.edu Clemens Szyperski,
Microsoft Research,
cszypers@microsoft.com & others
This panel (part of the 2003 Onward! program) will discuss repositories,
and reuse. While there is so much hype and noise about components and model
repositories, metadata and reuse there is still very little understood about
how hard it is to design for reuse and to encourage systematic reuse both in
terms of culture, design, and supporting tools and technology. Like standards we have a plethora of component models
to choose from and yet the long predicted component market place has yet to occur or has it already happened?
Our educational colleagues outside of the our community are blindly following
our rhetoric to build eLearning repositories so Learning Objects can be snapped
together just like the OO folks do it! Similarly object zealots are arguing
for OO XML, OO CSS to facilitate reuse OO style.
Our panelists have participated in both the euphoric vision as well as the pragmatic realities of repositories reuse in practice.
The panel has been asked to discuss their future vision for reuse and repositories and in particular what key social, business
and technical enablers will facilitate significant reuse or render the matter irrelevant.
|
What's so eXtreme About Doing Things Right?
Thursday, 30 October
13:30-15:00
Steve Berczuk (Chair),
Independent Consultant,
steve@berzuk.com Neil Harrison,
Avaya Labs,
nbharrison@avaya.com Kevlin Henney,
Curbralan,
kevlin@curbralan.com Joshua Kerievsky,,
Industrial Logic,
joshua@industriallogic.com Linda Rising,
Independent Consultant,
risingl@acm.org Ken Schwaber,
ADM,
ken.schwaber@verizon.net Bobby Woolf,
Independent Consultant,
woolf@acm.org
|
|
Agile Methods are advocated as a way of producing better software. Advocates of agile methods suggest that practices such
as keeping in close communication with your customers, frequent integration, and frequent assessment of project status will
enable us to produce software that has value for the customer—quality software. It's hard to argue with that. But why is
this any different than simply "good" software development practice? Why does saying "Scrum" "Agile" or "XP" grab peoples'
attention? Why does it take a name for useful practices to be accepted? This panel will help us understand the role of hype
in getting useful practices accepted or rejected. We will explore why it is that these good ideas have not been more widely
used. Some of the questions that the panel and the audience will explore are: Why do we ignore proven practices until we see
them packaged as a "method?" Can we do something different in the workplace or in school to teach these practices? Or is it
the case that these practices are not universally good? This panel talks about agility in a different context than what is
typical: we won't just discuss what agile practices are. We will explore why they are not more widely adopted, especially
when not packaged as part of a "named" method like XP, and we will discuss why projects suffer even when the methods that
can help them are well known. This panel will provide an entertaining and thought provoking forum for discussing an issue
that is ever present in the world of technology: the role of hype. We concentrate on agile practices, moving beyond simply
enumerating them, to discussing why they are not more widely adopted.
Application Servers: One Size Fits All ... Not?
Thursday, 30 October
13:30-15:00
Gail E. Harris (Chair),
Instantiated Software Inc.,
gail.harris@instantiated.ca Jeromy Carrière,
Microsoft Corporation,
jeromyc@microsoft.com John Crupi,
Sun Microsystems,
john.crupi@sun.com David Leibs,
Oracle Corporation,
david.leibs@oracle.com Fred Nagy,
Solutions In Context,
fred.nagy@solutionsincontext.ca Martin Nally,
IBM Corporation,
nally@us.ibm.com
|
|
In the beginning there was machine language, followed by assembly language, formula translation, and eventually procedural
programming, to organize the chaos. And then objects were introduced, to hide information. Soon Client/Server and multi-tier
applications were conceived to separate data concerns from business logic concerns and user interface concerns. Later, these
objects were distributed geographically to optimize hardware resources. And now, we have application servers, to simplify
scaling up a system for large volumes, improved response times, impeccable reliability, and high availability. Application
servers house the business logic, operating on data from a different server, and responding to requests from any source. But
these Application Servers come in all shapes, flavors, and sizes. What is a developer to do? This panel will explore issues
comparing application server technologies and questions about their appropriate use in different contexts.
|