4 ms·
This is also why the most hilarious anti-feature of Jira, supposedly a tool to manage agile teams, is how every ticket has one person assigned to it. If you do
by hibikir 3y ago
This is also why the most hilarious anti-feature of Jira, supposedly a tool to manage agile teams, is how every ticket has one person assigned to it. If you do sufficient pairing, the person assigned to a ticket is completely useless. Also why performance measurement from the outside of a team is always going to be dubious.
Every team knows their best performers, and their lowest performers. The number of points aren't going to line up with performance most of the time, precisely because time helping others is never going to show up. And if suddenly getting help lowers your review, you are going to ask for less help, not more: Trading accuracy in external performance tracking for lowered team performance sounds really dubious.
- voytec 3y ago> supposedly a tool to manage agile teams, is how every ticket has one person assigned to it. It's whoever owns the issue. You can make it an epic and assign particular sub-tasks to team members if it's a teamwork.
- desbo 3y agoAnd if there’s pairing on a sub-task…?
- ChrisLTD 3y agoNot sure how that solves the pair programming issue. What you’d need is a way to split the points for a single task among 2+ people without the overhead of duplicating the ticket.
- fragmede 3y agoIt's, what, two clicks to duplicate a ticket, and another to assign one to other person? Sure a "this person paired" button would be easier, but sometimes you just gotta do jira chores.
- ChrisLTD 3y agoThen the status has to be tracked in two places. It’s certainly not impossible, but as a programmer I’m allergic to unnecessary busywork.
- ResearchCode 3y agoThen get rid of the "points" and maybe the "tickets" too.
- ChrisLTD 3y agoIn my team, points and tickets are useful for knowing we’ve scheduled a solid - not overwhelming or underwhelming - amount of work.
- ResearchCode 3y agoGet rid of the scheduling too if you're doing it too often. Two times a year is good enough.
- fragmede 3y agoIf only there were some person who's job it was to deal with said busy work because you think it's beneath you. Some sort of manager of the program, who is also technical.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]