5 ms·

I think we would all want our own offices and some peace and quiet. Also the Agile industrial complex is a bunch of charlatans. Real agile is a good set of guid

I think we would all want our own offices and some peace and quiet. Also the Agile industrial complex is a bunch of charlatans. Real agile is a good set of guidelines. Aside from that this article seems off the mark and self contradictory. 1. How would a change be up in an hour if it required QA? 2. How is code review important but pair programming bad? 3. How is designing systems to be testable easily a bad idea? (I understand TDD is more than just this but it also implies this) 4. How does he reconcile his thesis with the explosion of Billion and Trillion dollar companies who embrace the practices he opposes. Clearly it can work. 5. Many of his practices are great for a Sr dev. But how do you level up Jrs? 6. The knock on Googling and SO seems off. Sorry for using some of the best tech ever made for dev productivity? Sorry we don’t solder our own chips? Sorry Googles top engineers built that mostly through pair programming? (Jeff and Sanjay). 7. Must be nice to just rage quit at the slightest annoyance. I am sure he is real nice to work with and discuss architecture with too. Also explains his disdain for the social aspect.

jonstewart 5y ago
I don’t think anyone who’s ever programmed with Ward Cunningham would call him a charlatan.
- pcmoney 5y ago
  I mean all the people trying to sell you methodologies and scrum masters and all that huey. The manifesto is just guidelines and tradeoff preferences. Its nothing special, its nothing new, its just concise and unfortunately marketable.
- corpMaverick 5y ago
  I don't think the parent comment is talking about Ward or any of the original signers of the Agile Manifest. I think it is talking about all the consultants that sell services that do not understand the original principles.
  - mcguire 5y ago
    Are there original signers of the Agile Manifest who aren't consultants?
- mcguire 5y ago
  Has anyone ever programmed with Ward Cunningham? What code has he shipped?
  - jdlshore 5y ago
    I have, and so have a lot of people. (Look up “Ward Number”). He worked at Tektronix back in the day. He created the WikiWikiWeb in about 90 lines of tight Perl. He is currently building the Federated Wiki. He’s currently working at New Relic, last I heard. He also created Fit, which I had the pleasure of working with him on. It was a very different coding style than mine, very tight and flexible. I learned a lot.
scotty79 5y ago
> How would a change be up in an hour if it required QA? Super easy. Just close cooperation with tester who's job is to test the change. You can with within an hour even with multiple back and forth.
- pcmoney 5y ago
  That sounds…inefficient. Push code, ping QA, they test find issues, ping you, you fix, ping QA…
  - scotty79 5y ago
    Yup, super efficient if that's priority issue to resolve. In this type of 1 on 1 session with a customer, who was acting as a QA I managed to resolve more than 10 issues on the fly within an hour. We had multiple sessions like that and they were very productive. Some issues couldn't be fixed "while you wait" of course and had to be postponed and checked and fine tuned on next session.
    - pcmoney 5y ago
      Those must have been very trivial bugs with very cursory manual QA. No complex side effects or interdependencies. Could have done it in 30 then with TDD.
      - scotty79 5y ago
        Not really. Writing test for them. being trivial and all, would take many times more time than fixing them. Those bugs had limited impact so the QA could manually test all the reasonable places of impact after my fix, while I was fixing the next one. It was really great feeling of interaction and collaboration. I felt like a proper wizard and I knew that after this sessions all the things we fixed are good. This is completely incomparable to TDD, where you just sit in your own muck and shovel it back and forth with very little interaction with outside reality ending up with ton of code that does nothing because it just makes tests that will never fail or they fail all at once because they will fail only if something very major breaks.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

jonstewart 5y ago

I don’t think anyone who’s ever programmed with Ward Cunningham would call him a charlatan.

pcmoney 5y ago
I mean all the people trying to sell you methodologies and scrum masters and all that huey. The manifesto is just guidelines and tradeoff preferences. Its nothing special, its nothing new, its just concise and unfortunately marketable.
corpMaverick 5y ago
I don't think the parent comment is talking about Ward or any of the original signers of the Agile Manifest. I think it is talking about all the consultants that sell services that do not understand the original principles.
- mcguire 5y ago
  Are there original signers of the Agile Manifest who aren't consultants?
mcguire 5y ago
Has anyone ever programmed with Ward Cunningham? What code has he shipped?
- jdlshore 5y ago
  I have, and so have a lot of people. (Look up “Ward Number”). He worked at Tektronix back in the day. He created the WikiWikiWeb in about 90 lines of tight Perl. He is currently building the Federated Wiki. He’s currently working at New Relic, last I heard. He also created Fit, which I had the pleasure of working with him on. It was a very different coding style than mine, very tight and flexible. I learned a lot.

scotty79 5y ago

> How would a change be up in an hour if it required QA? Super easy. Just close cooperation with tester who's job is to test the change. You can with within an hour even with multiple back and forth.

pcmoney 5y ago
That sounds…inefficient. Push code, ping QA, they test find issues, ping you, you fix, ping QA…
- scotty79 5y ago
  Yup, super efficient if that's priority issue to resolve. In this type of 1 on 1 session with a customer, who was acting as a QA I managed to resolve more than 10 issues on the fly within an hour. We had multiple sessions like that and they were very productive. Some issues couldn't be fixed "while you wait" of course and had to be postponed and checked and fine tuned on next session.
  - pcmoney 5y ago
    Those must have been very trivial bugs with very cursory manual QA. No complex side effects or interdependencies. Could have done it in 30 then with TDD.
    - scotty79 5y ago
      Not really. Writing test for them. being trivial and all, would take many times more time than fixing them. Those bugs had limited impact so the QA could manually test all the reasonable places of impact after my fix, while I was fixing the next one. It was really great feeling of interaction and collaboration. I felt like a proper wizard and I knew that after this sessions all the things we fixed are good. This is completely incomparable to TDD, where you just sit in your own muck and shovel it back and forth with very little interaction with outside reality ending up with ton of code that does nothing because it just makes tests that will never fail or they fail all at once because they will fail only if something very major breaks.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]