4 ms·
It makes a lot of sense, which is why a lot of people follow it. Your comment is implying that somehow 1000s of people around the world don't realise they are d
by lbriner 5y ago
It makes a lot of sense, which is why a lot of people follow it. Your comment is implying that somehow 1000s of people around the world don't realise they are doing something stupid.
You are portraying a poorly run implementation of agile as the only way and then destroying it. We call it a straw-man.
* My development team are rarely interuppted with customer meetings
* The meetings we have will always have outcomes, even if those are high-level "would this be possible?"
* Everything is not expected to be done "just-in-time" "on a whim", it is simply a case of allowing the highest priorities to be looked into in much shorter cycles.
* "Dev whiplash". Nope, not here. Poor architecture and tech debt? I haven't seen any more in the agile projects I have worked on compared to old waterfall projects.
* Tens of people who don't have any role. Nope
* Non-dev/product running meetings? Nope. Shouldn't happen and if it does, it's nothing to do with agile (or waterfall!)
* Borderline abusive?
- nautilius 5y agoI'm sure "It makes a lot of sense, which is why a lot of people follow it. Your comment is implying that somehow 1000s of people around the world don't realise they are doing something stupid." is exactly the comment that agile proponents heard when suggesting that waterfall may not be the right thing. (not arguing for one or the other, just pointing out that this argument does not mean anything).
- g051051 5y ago> Your comment is implying that somehow 1000s of people around the world don't realise they are doing something stupid. Agile and scrum have now been around long enough that large numbers of devs have never known anything else. So yes, they don't realize they're doing something stupid.
- Trasmatta 5y ago> You are portraying a poorly run implementation of agile as the only way and then destroying it. We call it a straw-man. Every time there's any criticism of agile, people inevitably show up and say "well, you're just doing it wrong". Maybe there's an issue with the methodology if it's so easy to get wrong, and happens so frequently? > Your comment is implying that somehow 1000s of people around the world don't realise they are doing something stupid. If you read any thread on agile, I think plenty of people know they're doing something stupid...
- AnimalMuppet 5y agoI've seen it done well, so it can be done. Plenty of people have seen waterfall done badly. Maybe it's so easy to get software development wrong. It's not just agile.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]