Software Reuse: Architecture, Process and Organization for Business Success by IvarJacobson, MartinGriss? and PatrikJonsson?.
From the book, the principles of successful reuse in organizations are:
Maintain top-management leadership and financial backing over the long term.
Plan and adapt the system architecture, the development processes, and the organization to the necessities of reuse in a systematic but incremental fashion. Start with small pilot projects, and then scale up.
Plan for reuse beginning with the architecture and an incremental architecting process.
Move to an explicitly managed reuse organization that separates the creation of reusable components from their reuse in application systems, and provides an explicit support function.
Create and evolve reusable components in a real working environment.
Manage application systems and reusable components as a product portfolio of financial value, focusing reuse on common components in high-payoff application and subsystem domains.
Realize that object or component technology alone is not sufficient.
Directly address organizational culture and change, using champions and change agents.
Invest in and continuously improve infrastructure, reuse education, and skills.
Measure reuse progress with metrics, and optimize the reuse program.
Kudos for putting the word "book" in the topic title. Some are against that practice, but it drives me bats to click on a title only to find it's a [bleep] book. -t
A [bleep] book? Those are my favourite kind of books. Do you have something against books and reading, Top? If you don't like reading, maybe you need new glasses.
I'm not Top, but I can guess why for his reasons, I likely share them. I'm watching this wiki, looking for cool and interesting things to learn, to see people discuss the ideas and technologies. In certain cases from the experts to defined some of the presented methodologies. So in recent changes or some other page I see a link to SoftwareReuse, then I'm looking forward to see what the wiki has to say about the topic, so if I go to a page and it is just a book. Now I won't have an interesting page to link friends to, or cite inclass, instead it becomes a deadend. If the commentary on the page is sufficiently interesting then I can contact my library and try to borrow the only copy in the state, or buying it. The link SoftwareReuseBook gives me a different set of expectations than SoftwareReuse, so if the first is used, I have lower and easier to met expectations vs the second name. - LurkerInDenver? think I got the formatting right this time.
There was a long and bitter dispute about this a few years ago. It's claimed it's a form of HungarianNotation, and thus bad by analogy, which I reject because book is not a "type". My argument was based on practicality, not mantra: it's fricking confusing. -t
CategoryReuse, CategoryBook, CategorySuccess