This time the debate was sparked by a article in Javaworld at http://www.javaworld.com/javaworld/jw-05-2005/jw-0509-architect.html
All the comments that were posted in response were very very interesting:
Also I was amused to hear what Martin Fowler of "ThoughtWorks" had to say about this topic.
In Agile methodologies, there is more focus on keeping components flexible and ready for change, hence the role of a architect also changes...Interesting read :)
Some really amusing comments are listed below : (who says developers do not have a good sense of humor)
- Of course there are organization where you have PowerPoint-architects who hide their ignorance and lack of actual knowledge behind stack loads of nice-looking high-level block-diagrams that do absolutely nothing and will never be looked upon a second time after they have been presented to the project board or whoever.
- Any of the following is much better definition of a (Java) architect :1. One who does not know how to start a java JVM. 2. One talks about UML all the times and present you a class diagram by copying from Gang of Four pattern book as his design.3. One who has never managed to write more than 100 lines of codes successfully.4. One who is the buddy of the VP of Engineering or CTO.