Revision as of 15:13, 10 January 2013 edit Walter Görlitz (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers 294,571 edits →The V-Model "in its simple and commonly understood form": response ← Previous edit		Revision as of 13:29, 12 January 2013 edit undo Freddie Threepwood (talk \| contribs) 206 edits →The V-Model "in its simple and commonly understood form" Next edit →
Line 76: : Why copy the material? Why not merge the two? Do you think that that they should be separate? : Also, don't worry about taking the article over, I don't see it that way. It seems more as though you understand the subject and enjoy writing. That makes you an ideal editor. In that light, [[:WP:BOLD\|make whatever changes you feel are necessary]]. --[[User:Walter Görlitz\|Walter Görlitz]] ([[User talk:Walter Görlitz\|talk]]) 15:13, 10 January 2013 (UTC) Thanks for this. Yes, I'll do something, but I'm too busy right now. I don't think merging the articles is the right way though. I think it's worth retaining two in the short term; one for the formal German V-Modell, the US government version and the detailed lifecycle version (Forsberg & Mooz), and a second (ie this one) for the more informal software testers' depiction of the lifecycle. It's this latter one that is probably most significant as it features in exam syllabuses. In the longer term the former should be broken out into its three constituent parts. Otherwise explanations can get hopelessly confused when one is dealing with things that look superficially similar but are really fundamentally different with quite distinct uses. [[User:Freddie Threepwood\|Freddie Threepwood]] ([[User talk:Freddie Threepwood\|talk]]) 13:29, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Talk:V-model (software development): Difference between revisions