3 ms·
Ah, I think I understand your point now... correct me if Im wrong, but I think you are mostly pointing out how my headline is sensationalist. I'd probably agree
by shepmaster 16y ago
Ah, I think I understand your point now... correct me if Im wrong, but I think you are mostly pointing out how my headline is sensationalist. I'd probably agree with that, and blame it on my inexperience with "hardcore" Gantt charts. :-)
My real point is that project plans often devolve into "we must do A before B before C", which artificially serializes development. This sequential nature has often been presented in Gantt chart form, so perhaps my ire has been poorly aimed.
- Groxx 16y agoGantts do tend to support over-serialization (I think it's the lines. Mustn't mess up the pretty lines, must we, Precious?), but that's an organizational abuse more than anything. A little sensationalist, yes, but I'm really not seeing any conceptual difference that's not part of the basic behavior of Gantt charts. If I'm missing something (fully possible, I'm a bit distracted), I'd be interested in knowing what it is.
- wisty 16y agoGantt charts were designed for "real" engineers, who worry about things like pouring in the cement foundations before painting the doors. They are just not designed for agile programmers. They can be used for software, and are somewhat useful, if only because nobody ever reads the spec, but they can see what must be done on the Gantt chart.