> Peter J Denning in 2008 wrote about reforming CACM in 1982/83. [ extract
at end ]
> <https://cacm.acm.org/opinion/dja-vu-all-over-again/>
That "accomplishment" drove me away from the ACM. I hope the following
explanation does not set off yet another long tangential discussion.
The CACM had been the prime benefit of ACM membership. It carried generally
accessible technical content across the whole spectrum of computing. The
"Journal for all Members" (JAM) reform resulted in such content being
thinly spread over several journals. To get the perspective that CACM had
offered, one would have had to subscribe to and winnow a mountain of
specialst literature--assuming the editors of these journals would accept
some ACM-style articles.
I had been an active member of ACM, having serving as associate editor of
three journals, member of the publications planning committee, national
lecturer, and Turing-Award chairman. When the JAM reform cut off my window
into the field at large, I quit the whole organization.
With the advent of WWW, the ACM Digital Library overcame the need to
subscribe to multiple journals for wide coverage. Fortunately I had
institutional acess to that. I rejoined ACM only after its decision to
allow free access to all 20th century content in the DL. This
public-spirited action more than atoned for the damage of the JAM reform
and warranted my support.
I have been happy to find that the current CACM carries one important
technical article in each issue and a couple of interesting columnists
among the generally insipid JAM content. And I am pleased by the news that
ACM will soon also give open access to most 21st-century content.
Doug
Found these two.
Anyone seen others?
I bought this book soon after it was published.
It’s a detailed study of some major IT projects, doesn’t draw “lessons” & rules like I’d expect of an MBA Case Study.
Why information systems fail: a case study approach
February 1993
<https://dl.acm.org/doi/book/10.5555/174553>
> On 5 Jul 2024, at 09:31, Lawrence Stewart <stewart(a)serissa.com> wrote:
>
> A quick search also shows a number of software engineering case study books.
================
Case Study Research in Software Engineering: Guidelines and Examples
April 2012
<https://dl.acm.org/doi/book/10.5555/2361717>
Based on their own experiences of in-depth case studies of software projects in international corporations,
in this bookthe authors present detailed practical guidelines on
the preparation, conduct, design and reporting of case studies of software engineering.
This is the first software engineering specific book on thecase study research method.
================
Case studies for software engineers
May 2006
<https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/1134285.1134497>
The topic of this full-day tutorial was the correct use and interpretation of case studies as an empirical research method.
Using an equal blend of lecture and discussion, it gave attendees
a foundation for conducting, reviewing, and reading case studies.
There were lessons for software engineers as researchers who
conduct and report case studies, reviewers who evaluate papers,
and practitioners who are attempting to apply results from papers.
The main resource for the course was the book
Case Study Research: Design and Methods by Robert K. Yin.
This text was supplemented with positive and negative examples from the literature.
================
--
Steve Jenkin, IT Systems and Design
0412 786 915 (+61 412 786 915)
PO Box 38, Kippax ACT 2615, AUSTRALIA
mailto:sjenkin@canb.auug.org.au http://members.tip.net.au/~sjenkin
Links for those who’ve not read these articles. Open access, downloadable PDF’s.
================
Peter J Denning in 2008 wrote about reforming CACM in 1982/83. [ extract at end ]
<https://cacm.acm.org/opinion/dja-vu-all-over-again/>
The space shuttle primary computer system
Sept 1984
<https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/358234.358246>
The TWA reservation system
July 1984
<https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/358105.358192>
================
After Editor in Chief of the ACM, in 1993 Denning established "The Center for the New Engineer" (CNE)
<http://www.denninginstitute.com/cne/cne-aug93.pdf>
Great Principles of Computing, paper
<https://denninginstitute.com/pjd/PUBS/ENC/gp08.pdf>
Website
<https://denninginstitute.com/pjd/GP/GP-site/welcome.html>
================
Denning, 2008
Another major success was the case studies conducted by Alfred Spector and David Gifford of MIT,
who visited project managers and engineers at major companies and interviewed them about their projects,
producing no-holds-barred pieces.
This section was wildly popular among the readers.
Unfortunately, the labor-intensive demands of the post got the best of them after three years, and we were not able to replace them.
Also by that time, companies were getting more circumspect about discussing failures and lessons learned in public forums.
================
> On 5 Jul 2024, at 09:31, Lawrence Stewart <stewart(a)serissa.com> wrote:
>
> Alright, apologies for being late.
>
> Back in 1984, David Gifford and Al Spector started a series of case studies for CACM.
> I think only two were published, on the TWA reservation system and on the Space Shuttle primary computer.
--
Steve Jenkin, IT Systems and Design
0412 786 915 (+61 412 786 915)
PO Box 38, Kippax ACT 2615, AUSTRALIA
mailto:sjenkin@canb.auug.org.au http://members.tip.net.au/~sjenkin
Steve Jenkin:
I've never heard of a Computer Science or Software Engineering program
that included a `case study' component, especially for Software
Development & Projects.
[...]
Creating Unix V6, because it profoundly changed computing & development,
would seem an obvious Case Study for many aspects of Software, Coding
and Projects.
====
How about the course for which John Lions wrote his famous
exegesis of the 6/e kernel?
Norman Wilson
Toronto ON
David Rosenthal reflects on his involvement with the development
of the X Window System:
> Although most of my time was spent developing NeWS, I rapidly
> ported X version 10 to the Sun/1, likely the second port to
> non-DEC hardware. It worked, but I had to kludge several areas
> that depended on DEC-specific hardware. The worst was the
> completely DEC-specific keyboard support.
>
> Because it was clear that a major redesign of X was needed to
> make it portable and in particular to make it work well on Sun
> hardware, Gosling and I worked with the teams at DEC SRC and WRL
> on the design of X version 11. Gosling provided significant
> input on the imaging model, and I designed the keyboard
> support. As the implementation evolved I maintained the Sun port
> and did a lot of testing and bug fixing. All of which led to my
> trip to Boston to pull all-nighters at MIT finalizing the
> release.
>
> My involvement continued after the first release. I was the
> editor and main author of the X Inter-Client Communications
> Conventions Manual (ICCCM) that forms Part III of Robert
> Scheifler and Jim Gettys' X Window System.
-- https://blog.dshr.org/2024/07/x-window-system-at-40.html
Alexis.
