4 ms·
> Rapid release means I can no longer rely on the software that engages in it. It's constantly shifting, with frequent changes in UI and workflow, and new and e
by MikePlacid 4y ago
> Rapid release means I can no longer rely on the software that engages in it. It's constantly shifting, with frequent changes in UI and workflow, and new and exciting bugs constantly appearing.
There’s something terribly wrong in the picture you’ve described. I do not know what Agile stands for, but our company was doing “a new version each Friday” for like 15 years. One of the axioms of such a fast turnout was “a new version should work in the old environment exactly the same as the old version” - except bug fixes of cause, some of which were made optional nevertheless.
- Aloha 4y agoI think this is a great point. When agile and rapid release is done correctly, it should work out as "kaizen for software" not "we overhaul our UI and workflow every 3-6 months". Small incremental change is easier to test in most cases, the issue is, changing software that was designed as a whole over to incremental feature improvements is hard, because often the existing bulk of code cannot be meaningfully unit tested.
- AdrianB1 4y agoYour company is doing it right, but that is not Agile :)
- parasubvert 4y agoIt’s also not not agile.
- dottedmag 4y agoIs there Agile Certification Board that decides?