3 ms·
> In terms of programming-in-the-large, at Google and elsewhere, I think that language choice is not as important as all the other choices: if you have the righ
by jimbokun 5y ago
> In terms of programming-in-the-large, at Google and elsewhere, I think that language choice is not as important as all the other choices: if you have the right overall architecture, the right team of programmers, the right development process that allows for rapid development with continuous improvement, then many languages will work for you; if you don't have those things you're in trouble regardless of your language choice.
"the right overall architecture, the right team of programmers, the right development process that allows for rapid development with continuous improvement" should be the working definition of "agile" development in almost every context. Would save a lot of confusion and pointless arguments about the true definition of agile, kanban, extreme programming, or what have you.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- lostcolony 5y agohttps://agilemanifesto.org/ https://agilemanifesto.org/ Most of the things you list are things you may or may not get right the first time; what makes something agile, at least, when the term was first floated, was the ability for the team to own the solution, say "this is not working" (be that architecture, team structure, process, etc), and change it easily. Agile was "ability to (rapidly) change", not "adherence to a defined set of rules called 'Agile' ". Most places don't actually seek out that definition of agile, though. And so there's a lot of bikeshedding around "what process is the one true way (and what can we add to it to make it work when it fails us)" rather than "how do we empower the teams to make their own decisions on how to best be effective"