<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>PHPDeveloper.org</title>
    <link>http://www.phpdeveloper.org</link>
    <description>Up-to-the Minute PHP News, views and community</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 19 Jun 2013 02:52:42 -0500</pubDate>
    <ttl>30</ttl>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[Mayflower Blog: Software Architecture Decisions - How to do it Wrong the Hard & Easy Way]]></title>
      <guid>http://www.phpdeveloper.org/news/18128</guid>
      <link>http://www.phpdeveloper.org/news/18128</link>
      <description><![CDATA[<p>
On the MayFlower blog today there's a new post looking at <a href="http://blog.mayflower.de/archives/875-Software-Architecture-Decisions-how-to-do-it-wrong-the-hard-and-the-easy-way.html">two ways to do software architecture</a> (the easy way and hard way) and some of the traditional practices behind its development.
</p>
<blockquote>
When it comes to software architecture, stuff gets funny. First we learn everything about it at university. We learn to use it as a part of our main project plan. We learn how to do risk evaluation. [...] Since we didn't have a lot of experience with software back then, the resulting architecture is a badly done, but well documented. This style of software architecture is called "Enterprise Architecture" and usually done by consultants.
</blockquote>
<p>
They talk about delivering software versus delivering documentation and list some of the actual common reasons software architecture turns out how it does including: "I read about it in a blog", "It worked for me once" and the idea of the "Golden Hammer" of standardized structures.
</p>]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 Jun 2012 10:55:10 -0500</pubDate>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
