Then a Miracle Occurs

DEVELOPING a softwareintensive system is like raising a child. As Will PleasantRyan observed, both babies and code have smells, you get used to changing requirements, you have to take the long view, you can’t do it alone, and eventually you have to let go.1 I would add to Will’s most excellent simile that, although you might think you know everything up front, you certainly don’t, and therefore you end up discovering a lot of things along the way. Furthermore, in this age of cognitive systems, you also have to both teach them and give them the skills to learn on their own. Finally— as they all probably should anyway— they sometimes turn out very different from what you rst expected. Developing a softwareintensive system is like producing a movie. Tony DeRose of Pixar had much to say about this simile,2 as did the good folks in the early agile community.3 Both software development and lmmaking require the skills of a diverse set of stakeholders who must work together intensely for short bursts of time. Talent matters, and as such you must often deal with strong personalities. Although the bones of the delivered artifacts might be clear, opportunities exist for creatively pivoting along the way to tell the right story at the right time in the right way. If you’re really successful, you’ll be asked to make a sequel, and you might even turn a small indie project into a large moneymaking franchise. Developing a softwareintensive system is like releasing a new drug. Pedram Alaedini and his colleagues observed that software development and drug development are “highly complex, rely on multidisciplinary teams, and usually come in late and over budget. In addition, they are often judged based on the same quality factors: reliability, safety, and ef ciency.”4 I would add that in both cases, the stakes are high: your efforts might improve the lives of millions, but you might also cause some deaths along the way. Developing a softwareintensive system is like writing a novel. J.J. Merelo gave us a riff on this comparison.5 Both tasks are creative endeavors. Both require collaboration. Both must “ nd their own voice, but at the same time rely on the tropes of the genre and on plot lines that have been there for millennia” (in the world of software, we call these patterns). Both must appeal to their particular audience. Both are full of surprises and contain many little languages. And while they must adapt themselves to the medium, their very presence changes the medium itself. Developing a softwareintensive system is like dating. The delightful book Dating Design Patterns6 explored this rich