I absolutely was not saying that as a software developer, you need consultants or branded methodologies to tell you how to do your job. Did you read the article

I absolutely was not saying that as a software developer, you need consultants or branded methodologies to tell you how to do your job. Did you read the article? I thought the point of it was that software "methodologies" are essentially just putting names to solid development practices. If you'd even read the title of the article, you would have gotten that out of it. What I was trying to express is that at least _some_ formalization of your process is vital, and giving it a name lets you develop a common vocabulary. Then, when you bring in a new person and tell them you use Scrum (for example), if they've used it before, they have a basic understanding of how you do business. If not, they at least have something they can Google for. The specific point that I was trying to refute is that process is "anathema" to hacker culture. You simply cannot gunslinger your way through a large development effort. And, I stand by my original statement, in that if you believe that you can succeed with a team of more than 3 or 4 people working on a project with no real process, then you haven't tried (and failed). I know, because I felt that way before I had the experience to know better. I wasn't intending for it to sound condescending, but take it that way if you must. Thanks in advance! <-- This _was_ meant to sound condescending, though. Sarcastic, too.