Top Quality Standards for Architecture Reviews

by Bryan-Zheng on Oct 02, 2012 |

Architecture is one of the most important elements in software development. Many organizations do architecture reviews due to its critical role. But different organizations in different industries and contexts have their own different standards of qualities. Finding out the most common ones might lead to better ways to develop and improve the standards for these organisations, and it's also give the community a common base to start discussion.

 

 

Related Editorial

Hello stranger!

You need to Register an InfoQ account or to post comments. But there's so much more behind being registered.

Get the most out of the InfoQ experience.

Tell us what you think

Allowed html: a,b,br,blockquote,i,li,pre,u,ul,p

Email me replies to any of my messages in this thread
Community comments

Doesn't work by Dinkar Gupta

There seems to be some issue. After voting and proper authentication, I get "Please wait while we cast your vote..." forever and nothing happens. Is it just me ?

Needs context by Eoin Woods

This is entirely meaningless - the answers to this are totally context dependent. For the replies to be useful, you need to understand the context at least in terms of application domain and application type. And probably more.

Bad design by Igor MILOVANOVIĆ

This survey is badly designed. There are basically two problems:
1. Functional: Even if I am signed in, after I submitted vote, it asks me for my 3rd party ID. This smells to me as marketing trick to get some leads?
2. Contextual: This survey lacks context. In order to answers have any real value there has to be some context inside which we are considering proposed qualities.

Functionality not that important? by Arash Bizhanzadeh

I found it very amusing that the functionality of the system is not number one concern here. Does it mean that architect prefer a system that does nothing, but is highly modular?

Re: Functionality not that important? by Alan McNamara

Reviewing architecture has different concerns to reviewing functionality. It is not that functionality is not important, just that different tools (code inspection, testing, etc.) rather than architectural review are the best tools to address this concern.

Inversely, given that any review has finite resources, the focus of architectural reviews are the concerns (Changeability, Buildability, etc.) which cannot be assessed by tools idea for addressing functionality and correctness.

Re: Needs context by santhosh sr

Yes, That's your job. To prioritize the above according to your needs

Allowed html: a,b,br,blockquote,i,li,pre,u,ul,p

Email me replies to any of my messages in this thread

Allowed html: a,b,br,blockquote,i,li,pre,u,ul,p

Email me replies to any of my messages in this thread

6 comments
General Feedback
Bugs
Advertising
Editorial
 InfoQ.com and all content copyright © 2006-2013 C4Media Inc. InfoQ.com hosted at Contegix, the best ISP we've ever worked with.
Privacy policy