4 ms·
The things you cite as "Yak territory" are just bad, anti-productive decisions. Yak shaving, by definition, is a seemingly unrelated problem that _needs_ to be
by crispyambulance 8y ago
The things you cite as "Yak territory" are just bad, anti-productive decisions.
Yak shaving, by definition, is a seemingly unrelated problem that _needs_ to be solved before progressing with the primary task. In other words, if it's merely an optional decision, it's not really "Yak shaving".
The only way you avoid Yak shaving is by an uncanny combination of careful planning and organizational flexibility. Sometimes Yak shaving can't be avoided, that's OK, it's a learning experience and it builds skills, character and funny stories.
- peteretep 8y ago> Yak shaving, by definition Depends whose definition you choose to use. The apparent primary source[0] doesn't have it as a dependency, the later jargon file does[1], and then there are seem to be an approximate equal split of others. [0] https://projects.csail.mit.edu/gsb/old-archive/gsb-archive/gsb2000-02-11.html https://projects.csail.mit.edu/gsb/old-archive/gsb-archive/g... [1] http://catb.org/jargon/html/Y/yak-shaving.html http://catb.org/jargon/html/Y/yak-shaving.html
- setr 8y agoMy internal definition is something close to "7-steps removed"; yak-shaving is yak-shaving when you end up pretty far from the problem itself; whether its actually good or required is independent, just the fact that it might be time to start wondering if you went on too many tangents. Eg quintessential example of knuth -- everything he did was good work, and in the end useful for his overarching goals... but at some point in the middle of that situation its time to start wondering if he's gone off the deep end. Whether you decide yes or no, it doesn't matter, you're still deep in yak territory