2 ms·
> The kicker is that none of this has a damn thing to do with scheduling. Once you can tell reliably tell me you're going to deliver 10% of the remaining total
by spacemanaki 14y ago
> The kicker is that none of this has a damn thing to do with scheduling. Once you can tell reliably tell me you're going to deliver 10% of the remaining total work in the next two weeks, I know for a fact you have 18 more weeks left in the project.
Wait am I missing something or did you just say that this has nothing to do with scheduling but then extrapolate some estimate in order some up with a schedule? (not trolling, legitimately confused)
- DanielBMarkham 14y agoYes. What you end up doing is getting good at determining what percentage of remaining work you can accomplish in each sprint. This information can be applied offline to schedule. You get a schedule without ever having any conversation about duration or time. The "magic" works because by picking what you can do in a sprint, you are associating a certain percentage of work with a time unit. So you it's not like there is no time discussion. It's more accurate to say that you don't keep multiple sets of books. Like a cool programming concept, it's one of those things that once you see, you're like wow! But granted it can be a head-scratcher beforehand. Like I said, I came at this as a skeptic. Once you see it work in multiple teams, however, you don't want to go back to the old way. It just doesn't make any sense to do it like that.