• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    87 months ago

    Gotta remember it was a response to water fall. Docs didn’t mean the man page or the wiki, they ment the spec sheet, PowerPoint’s, graphs, white papers, diagrams, aggreements and contracts, etc. Where you might go MOUNTHS making paperwork before you ran a single line of logic.

    Docs SHOULD be the last resort of an engineer if your UX just can’t be intuitive in some way or some problem domain just can’t be simple. You should first strive to make it work well.

    For example Lemmy, it just would work if you needed to read the Lemmy user guide first to post on Lemmy. That would indicate bad UX, but that was how it was back in the day.

    • Carighan Maconar
      link
      37 months ago

      It wasn’t, Waterfall in itself was a contrived example of a bad setup. More common was UP, or something UP-like.

        • Carighan Maconar
          link
          27 months ago

          Unified process, which, despite usually not being called that way and/or being codified in the way it is nowadays, is how virtually all early software companies did their development work post-punchcards (when you no longer had to get things done in a single step).

          It’s why the “agile is better because iterative hoooo!” is so laughable, because even though we didn’t yet call it iterative - as a distinction from pre-planned, since we thought in punchcards+mainframe vs after that - we did iterative work. Of course we did, software development is naturally iterative and Waterfall was the contrived contrasting example of how a non-iterative process would look.