Ofcourse Architects needs to code. Otherwise how on earth they will keep up with new knowledge updates? Rocky, let's take your example, if you don't code, how will you understand problems in CSLA.NET and solve them over next iteration(s) ?

Architects can code other things, whether related to production system or not, but they must code that's my view.

@parag, I agree - I think an architect who completely stops coding will become ineffectual after a couple years.

At the same time, someone who engages in full-time coding can't be an effective architect either, because they'll be unable to keep up with all the other stuff that's going on in technology and business - they get stuck in time with whatever technology is being used by their project.

So I think that blog post has a lot of very valid points, most notably the idea that you can't expect to pull the architect out of their role and have them code - that'll cost you the architect.

And you can't just have the architect there at the start of the project and have them disappear - because the project will always drift away from the architecture - usually in ways that lose most benefits and (sadly) retain most complexity.