3 ms·
I think most successful agile teams would adopt those non-functional requirements not as tasks to be implemented but as cross-cutting concerns of all work. Ie,
by robinwarren 11y ago
I think most successful agile teams would adopt those non-functional requirements not as tasks to be implemented but as cross-cutting concerns of all work. Ie, on a Scrum team they could be part of the Definition of Done, ie "Is the code maintainable" which would not allow some work to be considered completed until it met that definition.
I'm not 100% clear on what you are saying but it sounds like you think agile teams ignore these non-functional requirements in favour of perceived progress on features. I think that may well be true in practice but it is also true of non-agile teams. It is in fact just true of immature development teams the world over. Being agile or not has nothing to do with it. Scrum and other processes do at least try to have something in place to cater for these requirements, which often sadly get overlooked when pressure is applied to make flat out progress on features.
- partycoder 11y agoI concur. But it was mostly in response to the article. I do believe though that there are many engineers that highly disregard good practices because they get a political benefit from releasing more. Just like politicians get appraisal when doing ribbon cutting at inaugurations, and never when repairing a bridge, many organizations promote the engineers that deliver more features, not the ones that keep the system working. By doing this they create a culture of technical debt and failure.