4 ms·

May I ask what could possibly take 12 weeks worth of work before having anything useful? The idea behind any agile method is exactly to fight that kind of ment

by tucaz 9y ago

May I ask what could possibly take 12 weeks worth of work before having anything useful? The idea behind any agile method is exactly to fight that kind of mentality that says you can only have software done in a Big Bang approach where everything gets released all at once. If a piece of software needs 12 weeks to be done then there is something wrong with your software environment. There’s always a way to release something useful in 2 weeks or even less. Some people do daily releases. The catch here that might not be obvious unless you look for it is that what you release in 2 weeks doesn’t have to be complete. Just ready. If you are making a search engine of course you need more than 12 weeks, but in the first sprint you can release the component to tokenize strings, for example.

sheepmullet 9y ago
> May I ask what could possibly take 12 weeks worth of work before having anything useful? 12 person weeks is a tiny amount of effort. > but in the first sprint you can release the component to tokenize strings, for example. Ah I see - You just have to redefine what useful means :P. If your customer needs a search engine then having a string tokenizer is not useful at all. You don't run a project this way to improve individual developer productivity. You run it this way to reduce infrastructure and project risk. Often using Scrum practices is a good tradeoff - the problem is the messaging. The truth is we are trading off developer productivity and growth in order to lower overall risk and make the software process more predictable.
chuck4932 9y ago
My problem is not with releasing new code every 2 weeks. I am 100% in favour of that I try and keep my releases as small and as frequent as possible. My problem is with planning/grooming/reviewing/presenting every single 2 week release. I think it should be up to the developer to decide how often they release new code not the product manager or anybody else. Of course it is always better to release often and in small amounts but this is not always possible hence why it should be at the developer's discretion.

by tucaz 9y ago

sheepmullet 9y ago

> May I ask what could possibly take 12 weeks worth of work before having anything useful? 12 person weeks is a tiny amount of effort. > but in the first sprint you can release the component to tokenize strings, for example. Ah I see - You just have to redefine what useful means :P. If your customer needs a search engine then having a string tokenizer is not useful at all. You don't run a project this way to improve individual developer productivity. You run it this way to reduce infrastructure and project risk. Often using Scrum practices is a good tradeoff - the problem is the messaging. The truth is we are trading off developer productivity and growth in order to lower overall risk and make the software process more predictable.

chuck4932 9y ago

My problem is not with releasing new code every 2 weeks. I am 100% in favour of that I try and keep my releases as small and as frequent as possible. My problem is with planning/grooming/reviewing/presenting every single 2 week release. I think it should be up to the developer to decide how often they release new code not the product manager or anybody else. Of course it is always better to release often and in small amounts but this is not always possible hence why it should be at the developer's discretion.