راحتِ کون و مکاںؐ سے ہر خوشی کی آبرو
َ’’زندگی نے اُنؐ سے پائی زندگی کی آبرو‘‘
تاجدارِ دو جہاںؐ کے’’ فَقْرُ فَخْرِیْ‘‘ کے طفیل
ہے جہانِ رنگ و بُو میں سادگی کی آبرو
اتّباع رہبرِ جنّ و بشرؐ کے فیض سے
سوئے کعبہ ہر جبینِ بندگی کی آبرو
ہے شفیعِ المذنبیںؐ سے سارے عاصی آس مند
رب ھبلی کی دعا سے اُمّتی کی آبرو
ابنِ آدم کو عطا کی مسندِ انسانیت
فخرِ آدمؐ ہی کے دم سے آدمی کی آبرو
طائرِ حسنِ تخیل کی بھلا پرواز کیا
مدحتِ ممدوحِ رب سے شاعری کی آبرو
حبِّ محبوبِ خداؐ عرفانؔ کے دل کی طلب
آرزوئے دل یہی ہے دلبری کی آبرو
It is generally believed that the contemporary world of academia is divided between Divine and non-Divine philosophies. By considering the Divine theory in accordance to the human behavior, advocates of theory take it in the best interest of mankind. They argued that the Creator Himself guides the human being in right direction. Islam unlike modern concept of governance does not separate religion from politics and fulfills its legislative needs by means of Divine Law or Shariah. In Islamic system, the state through Caliph will have to establish Shariah of God by working on the restrictions set by Him and in conformity with His orders and commands. Yet he is allowed only to give lawful command and the people are also bound to follow only the lawful commands. In Islam there is no place for such a political order where a solitary individual or a group of persons have authoritarian or dictatorial rule. However, the Muslims, in all circumstances, must cling to the state authorities and are obliged to submit to the ultimate source of law given by the Almighty Allah in the Quran. Non-Divine theories, on the other hand mainly stress upon rationalization of human development and behavior in a certain direction. Leaving those theories aside, current study will focus on the political philosophy of Islam as prescribed by the teachings of Quran and Sunnah. The subject matter of the study is to see the possibilities regarding implementation of Islamic values in the contemporary state and society.
Scrum and Extreme Programming (XP) are frequently used models among all models of agile. Where as Rational Unified Process (RUP) is a conventional plan driven software development model. The agile and plan driven approaches both have their own strengths and weaknesses. A good feature of RUP model is that RUP works well for medium and large scale projects. Although RUP model has certain drawbacks, such as tendency to be over budgeted, slow in adaptation to rapidly changing requirements and reputation of being impractical for small and fast paced projects. Agile models being alternative to conventional models are not appropriate for large scale projects with significant light documentation. Strengths of Scrum and XP are that they are self managed processes through iterative planning.
RUP is slow in adaptation to rapidly changing requirements due to well established requirement documentation. This feature is not lacking in Scrum and XP models as they respond well to creeping requirements. Advantage of RUP model is that it focuses on satisfying business and customer needs by delivering quality software and gives comprehensive planning for the system. Major drawback of RUP model is that it fails to provide clear implementation guidelines and leaves the tailoring to the user entirely.
XP and scrum are self managed techniques through iterative planning. XP model has certain drawbacks such as weak documentation and poor performance for medium and large development projects. XP has a concrete set of engineering practices that emphasizes on team work where managers, customers and developers are all equal partners in collaborative team. Scrum is more concerned with the project management. It has seven practices namely Scrum Master, Scrum teams, Product Backlog, Sprint, Sprint Planning Meeting, Daily Scrum Meeting and Sprint Review.
Keeping above mentioned context in view, this thesis successfully proposed a SPRUP model by combining strengths of Scrum, XP and RUP as well as narrower the weaknesses to produce quality software. Proposed SPRUP model was validated through a controlled case study. The results of this case study were then compared with the results
of three of the case studies of Scrum, XP and RUP