• (cs)

    Hmm, the lower left corner looks like it could use some work...

  • Julchen (unregistered)

    Do you offer this as a printed poster? :-)

  • kikito (unregistered)

    Lol.

    That's definitively a multi-threaded library.

  • bebna (unregistered)

    What was the name of the depency tool?

  • Rae Stern (unregistered)

    In our day, your Father and I...we parted the hairs. And we loved it.

  • (cs)

    Finally, someone managed to put my Kismet script to shame!

  • Edward Royce (unregistered)

    What I liked was:

    "Sometimes enterprise happens."

    Make a t-shirt, offer it for sale; make it so.

  • Guillermo (unregistered) in reply to steenbergh

    For once, I am actually stunned by the content. A lot of the stuff on this site you can sorta squint and see why someone would do it that way, or justify it, or laugh it off as comedy.

    This one actually gave me chills.

  • Machtyn (unregistered)

    I second the printed poster comment. Add the tagline "Enterprise Happens" and you've got a goldmine.

  • (cs)

    I found something just like that blocking the drain once

  • (cs)

    This is all about Gnome, right?

  • Bael (unregistered)

    Looks like a government org chart. Except there's not enough cross-linking.

  • (cs)

    TRWTF is "building a Windows client application that would be frequently deployed to mobile employees over a VPN over a cell-phone data connection" - Including the deployment of the Framework.

    The targeted environments should already be provisioned with the Target Framework.

    Imagine a person who buys "PC" computer hardware to use a specialized calculator. One would not typically include the size of the Operating System, Application Runtime or other required items.

    ps: This does not eliminate the WTF on the dependency graph, especially since the first item referenced was a "Factory Factory" and all dependencies behind a factory should be "soft" (e.g. injected) except for the interfaces produced by the factory....

  • (cs)

    Spaghetti-code rules!

    (...and you-all thought it died with the GO TO!)

  • JSelf (unregistered)

    Oh! I thought 'loose coupling' meant not to fraternize with other employees.

  • My Name Is Missing (unregistered)

    Ah the old bird's nest architecture. In China they make soup of it.

  • trwtf (unregistered) in reply to Coyne
    Coyne:
    Spaghetti-code spaghetti-code rules!

    (...and you-all thought it died with the GO TO!)

    FTFY

  • trwtf (unregistered) in reply to trwtf
    trwtf:
    Coyne:
    Spaghetti-code spaghetti-code rules!

    (...and you-all thought it died with the GO TO!)

    FTFY

    F@cking Muphry.

  • (cs)

    Amateurs. I can still see the light of day through that dependency graph. Behold our enterprise-ness and despair:

    http://img222.imageshack.us/img222/7504/tes0001.jpg

    (Warning...not for the faint of heart.)

  • Craig B (unregistered) in reply to bebna

    This seems to be the tool: http://www.drewnoakes.com/code/dependancyanalyser/

  • Ben (unregistered) in reply to LieutenantFrost

    Sweet mother of mercy

  • rycamor (unregistered) in reply to LieutenantFrost
    LieutenantFrost:
    Amateurs. I can still see the light of day through that dependency graph. Behold our enterprise-ness and despair:

    http://img222.imageshack.us/img222/7504/tes0001.jpg

    (Warning...not for the faint of heart.)

    ...!

    Out of morbid curiosity, how many people working how long did it take to create this monstrosity?

    CAPTCHA most ironic: minim

  • (cs) in reply to rycamor
    rycamor:
    ...!

    Out of morbid curiosity, how many people working how long did it take to create this monstrosity?

    CAPTCHA most ironic: minim

    Grand total? Eight people over six years. The graph is actually about nine months out of date at this point. I have the full size version if you're one of those types who loves pain.

  • Eric (unregistered) in reply to LieutenantFrost

    I was going to post ours, but you... win... if that's the word for it. :)

  • Xan (unregistered) in reply to LieutenantFrost
    LieutenantFrost:
    Amateurs. I can still see the light of day through that dependency graph. Behold our enterprise-ness and despair:

    http://img222.imageshack.us/img222/7504/tes0001.jpg

    (Warning...not for the faint of heart.)

    Holy Christ!

  • rycamor (unregistered) in reply to LieutenantFrost
    LieutenantFrost:
    rycamor:
    ...!

    Out of morbid curiosity, how many people working how long did it take to create this monstrosity?

    CAPTCHA most ironic: minim

    Grand total? Eight people over six years. The graph is actually about nine months out of date at this point.

    See?!?! This proves that small focused teams can do anything a large team can do. Oh, wait...

    LieutenantFrost:
    I have the full size version if you're one of those types who loves pain.

    Oh, why not. I'm stuck home sick and bored anyway.

  • (cs) in reply to rycamor
    rycamor:
    See?!?! This proves that small focused teams can do anything a large team can do. Oh, wait...
    Keep in mind that there hasn't been more than two people working on it full-time at any point in those six years.

    And don't say I didn't warn you: http://img510.imageshack.us/img510/6071/tes0000.jpg

  • (cs) in reply to LieutenantFrost
    LieutenantFrost:
    rycamor:
    See?!?! This proves that small focused teams can do anything a large team can do. Oh, wait...
    Keep in mind that there hasn't been more than two people working on it full-time at any point in those six years.

    And don't say I didn't warn you: http://img510.imageshack.us/img510/6071/tes0000.jpg

    When you start thinking that dependency-mapping tools don't do the job and that you need Google Earth, quit.

  • Loic Nageleisen (unregistered) in reply to LieutenantFrost

    Is that a Rorschach test?

  • (cs)

    The "big ball of mud"-architecture is still one of the most used architectures out there ...

    Therefore you can call it: best practice!

  • (cs) in reply to Quicksilver
    Quicksilver:
    The "big ball of mud"-architecture is still one of the most used architectures out there ...

    Therefore you can call it: best practice!

    I wouldn't call it a ball, more like "pile." And it's definitely not mud.

  • rycamor (unregistered) in reply to LieutenantFrost
    LieutenantFrost:
    rycamor:
    See?!?! This proves that small focused teams can do anything a large team can do. Oh, wait...
    Keep in mind that there hasn't been more than two people working on it full-time at any point in those six years.

    And don't say I didn't warn you: http://img510.imageshack.us/img510/6071/tes0000.jpg

    Really, as scary as that is, you have inspired a certain awe in me. Most of the names seem sensible, and I can almost get a working picture of SuperMegaManufacturingIndustries, Inc. What I wouldn't give to see the database model behind this.

    But still... was there no other way?

  • Tom Jorgenson (unregistered) in reply to LieutenantFrost

    I wondered where all that hair on my head went to. I finally know.

  • (cs) in reply to Coyne
    Coyne:
    Spaghetti-code rules!

    (...and you-all thought it died with the GO TO!)

    When do you *believe* it died ?
  • (cs) in reply to rycamor
    rycamor:
    Really, as scary as that is, you have inspired a certain awe in me. Most of the names seem sensible, and I can almost get a working picture of SuperMegaManufacturingIndustries, Inc. What I wouldn't give to see the database model behind this.

    But still... was there no other way?

    The underlying database model

    And I have no doubt that there was another way, but all possible alternatives were forsaken about a year into development. I came on at about year three.

  • Ralph (unregistered) in reply to LieutenantFrost
    LieutenantFrost:
    Amateurs. I can still see the light of day through that dependency graph.
    Yeah, that's pretty much what I'm thinking. Heck, I've been doing dependency graphs ever since I wrote my own that output to a 132-column line printer, and this one isn't even out of first gear yet.

    You have to tackle a large software project a little at a time. I mean, you wouldn't print out all the source code would you? Just zoom in on one area, get familiar with that, and move on.

    Complexity is not always a WTF. Unnecessary complexity, sure, but that hasn't been proven here.

  • rycamor (unregistered) in reply to LieutenantFrost
    LieutenantFrost:
    rycamor:
    Really, as scary as that is, you have inspired a certain awe in me. Most of the names seem sensible, and I can almost get a working picture of SuperMegaManufacturingIndustries, Inc. What I wouldn't give to see the database model behind this.

    But still... was there no other way?

    The underlying database model

    I'm getting a 403 Forbidden response on that page.

  • (cs) in reply to rycamor
    rycamor:
    I'm getting a 403 Forbidden response on that page.

    Just GIS "huge friggin' explosion"

  • Dazed (unregistered) in reply to LieutenantFrost
    LieutenantFrost:
    Amateurs. I can still see the light of day through that dependency graph. Behold our enterprise-ness and despair:

    http://img222.imageshack.us/img222/7504/tes0001.jpg

    That's a despondency graph.
  • backForMore (unregistered)

    I don't believe it, that's just a x10000 view of the microfiber in my coat.

  • pjt33 (unregistered) in reply to LieutenantFrost
    LieutenantFrost:
    Amateurs. I can still see the light of day through that dependency graph. Behold our enterprise-ness and despair:

    http://img222.imageshack.us/img222/7504/tes0001.jpg

    (Warning...not for the faint of heart.)

    I understand the article to say that it's a dependency graph of assemblies, whereas yours looks like a dependency graph of classes. Big difference.

    For dependencies of classes, yours looks pretty typical.

  • frits (unregistered)

    Who hasn't done something like this?

    [image]
  • rycamor (unregistered) in reply to LieutenantFrost
    LieutenantFrost:
    rycamor:
    I'm getting a 403 Forbidden response on that page.

    Just GIS "huge friggin' explosion"

    Well, that brought me the most oddly unrelated assortment of images I've ever seen in a GIS. Good thing I am not at work today.

    Nothing related to database models that I could see.

    Anyway, no worries; the request was for rhetorical effect.

  • (cs) in reply to pjt33

    TYPICAL?? Please provide a list of companies you have worked for so that I don't ever send my resume to them.

  • (cs) in reply to rycamor
    rycamor:
    Well, that brought me the most oddly unrelated assortment of images I've ever seen in a GIS. Good thing I am not at work today.

    Nothing related to database models that I could see.

    Anyway, no worries; the request was for rhetorical effect.

    I was going to make a remark about turning safesearch on, but I actually tried that query this time and I'm inclined to agree. o_O

  • (cs) in reply to LieutenantFrost
    LieutenantFrost:
    Amateurs. I can still see the light of day through that dependency graph. Behold our enterprise-ness and despair:

    http://img222.imageshack.us/img222/7504/tes0001.jpg

    (Warning...not for the faint of heart.)

    Clearly this is a fabrication... they've simply plotted the deployment of the Vogon Constructor Fleet as they prepare to annihilate Earth to make way for the new interstellar bypass...

  • AMusingFool (unregistered) in reply to LieutenantFrost

    Thank you, Ozymandias.

  • Justin (unregistered) in reply to LieutenantFrost

    I think I see the shape of the United States in your dependency graph.

    CAPTCHA: damnum - all too fitting for this article

  • (cs) in reply to Justin
    Justin:
    I think I see the shape of the United States in your dependency graph.

    Yo, I heard you like maps in your map.

  • Paul Z (unregistered) in reply to LieutenantFrost

    Wow. Just...wow.

Leave a comment on “The Enterprise Dependency”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #333399:

Log Out

« Return to Article