<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Project Lifecycle Overview - Part I</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.pmhut.com/project-lifecycle-overview-part-i/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.pmhut.com/project-lifecycle-overview-part-i</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 24 May 2012 06:49:05 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Vincent Birlouez</title>
		<link>http://www.pmhut.com/project-lifecycle-overview-part-i/comment-page-1#comment-1825</link>
		<dc:creator>Vincent Birlouez</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 May 2009 15:12:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pmhut.com/?p=3138#comment-1825</guid>
		<description>Good overview. 
A comment though...on software projects it often makes sense to split those in 2 phases with the first phase being the Requirements phase, the second one being the realisation phase (design, build, test...).
This is good when the requirements are not easily scoped up front and the need to capture them BEFORE doing the planning for implementation is felt.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good overview.<br />
A comment though&#8230;on software projects it often makes sense to split those in 2 phases with the first phase being the Requirements phase, the second one being the realisation phase (design, build, test&#8230;).<br />
This is good when the requirements are not easily scoped up front and the need to capture them BEFORE doing the planning for implementation is felt.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

