5 ms·

You know the problem with those principles? They are not a methodology. Most of the problem described in the article -and everywhere- is precisely that "the th

You know the problem with those principles? They are not a methodology. Most of the problem described in the article -and everywhere- is precisely that "the theory is good but everybody is doing it wrong". But that doesn't really help, because it overlooks the fact that the origin of all this is just a pile of generic, hard-to-argue small-time guru ruminations. I mean, it is not necessarily bad advice: "These are valuable things and we think that in particular these ones are more valuable than those other ones". Okay. Probably. They do look good. Let's say they are. Now what? Oh, that's left as an exercise to the reader. It's funny. Just yesterday I almost had an argument over one of these things. I heard Karen say to the guy on my left that "Agile means less documentation", so I raised my eyebrow. "Agile means less defined documentation, more open, because documentation has no value at all" - she added. I was about to point out that that is not at all what it means, but then she went further and told him that what he needed to do was to "work as a team and become more involved in collaboration". That, right there, is the problem: pretending a bunch of cool sounding expressions can be a substitute for actual things like writing down what they wanted the guy to do.

apotheon 7y ago
It seems like the problem might be that people assume agile software development is, in and of itself, supposed to be a methodology. As I understand it, agile software development is meant to be a set of principles describing any methodology that serves those principles. As such, Extreme Programming is an agile methodology, intended to serve those principles when employed well, and Scrum is a pseudo-agile methodology that serves as the halfway point to which one might be able to drag management, but more often ends up being an excuse to measure developer productivity in story points. There's value in enumerating important principles for consistently pursuing quality work product. That's why the Agile Manifesto has value. The manifesto is just a manifesto, a statement of intent and principle, and not a methodology in and of itself. One doesn't need a published, monetized methodology to engage in agile software development. One simply needs a methodology -- whether unique to one's project, or widely known -- that reinforces those principles to engage in agile software development. The biggest problem with agile software development as a concept is that it, like any other elaboration of any principles of quality work, is that most people will fail to see the forest for the trees, will marry themselves to some well-marketed thing that pretends to be about principles, and will end up largely doing the same dumb crap they've always done.
geebee 7y ago
I agree. Over time, I've come, in my cynical moments, to see the agile manifesto as reading: -value trust over plotting and scheming -value open communication over hoarding information and deception -value disarmament over preparing for battle While we value the things on the left, we value not getting steamrolled by people who practice the things on the right even more.
yc-kraln 7y ago
The documentation one is the one that completely throws me for a loop, and why I will never be on-board with anything claiming to be Agile. You know what? sometimes the documentation is more important than the working code. We're not all building crappy web properties as an agency, sometimes we are building stuff that is supposed to last longer than any one developer's career. Sometimes just documenting what the thing is supposed to do and why would solve so many issues, but since people have gotten hooked on capital-A Agile so much has gone by the wayside, or been delegated to non-technical roles.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
dragonwriter 7y ago
> You know the problem with those principles? They are not a methodology. No, that's not the problem with the five values and twelve principles. In fact, the problem is the desire to have a single, divinely ordained methodology (which both the first value and twelfth principle reject, and that rejection is arguably the central basis of Agile.) OTOH, while it is good that the Manifesto and Principles don't ordain a methodology a it's bad that they are written in a way which makes it harder to extract actionable direction than is necessary.

apotheon 7y ago

It seems like the problem might be that people assume agile software development is, in and of itself, supposed to be a methodology. As I understand it, agile software development is meant to be a set of principles describing any methodology that serves those principles. As such, Extreme Programming is an agile methodology, intended to serve those principles when employed well, and Scrum is a pseudo-agile methodology that serves as the halfway point to which one might be able to drag management, but more often ends up being an excuse to measure developer productivity in story points. There's value in enumerating important principles for consistently pursuing quality work product. That's why the Agile Manifesto has value. The manifesto is just a manifesto, a statement of intent and principle, and not a methodology in and of itself. One doesn't need a published, monetized methodology to engage in agile software development. One simply needs a methodology -- whether unique to one's project, or widely known -- that reinforces those principles to engage in agile software development. The biggest problem with agile software development as a concept is that it, like any other elaboration of any principles of quality work, is that most people will fail to see the forest for the trees, will marry themselves to some well-marketed thing that pretends to be about principles, and will end up largely doing the same dumb crap they've always done.

geebee 7y ago

I agree. Over time, I've come, in my cynical moments, to see the agile manifesto as reading: -value trust over plotting and scheming -value open communication over hoarding information and deception -value disarmament over preparing for battle While we value the things on the left, we value not getting steamrolled by people who practice the things on the right even more.

yc-kraln 7y ago

The documentation one is the one that completely throws me for a loop, and why I will never be on-board with anything claiming to be Agile. You know what? sometimes the documentation is more important than the working code. We're not all building crappy web properties as an agency, sometimes we are building stuff that is supposed to last longer than any one developer's career. Sometimes just documenting what the thing is supposed to do and why would solve so many issues, but since people have gotten hooked on capital-A Agile so much has gone by the wayside, or been delegated to non-technical roles.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

dragonwriter 7y ago

> You know the problem with those principles? They are not a methodology. No, that's not the problem with the five values and twelve principles. In fact, the problem is the desire to have a single, divinely ordained methodology (which both the first value and twelfth principle reject, and that rejection is arguably the central basis of Agile.) OTOH, while it is good that the Manifesto and Principles don't ordain a methodology a it's bad that they are written in a way which makes it harder to extract actionable direction than is necessary.