Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Agile2005 - day 1 (Sunday)- session report

Expand Messages
  • jhrothjr
    The only thing on Sunday was the two intro sessions. I hit the Engineering Practices session, which was very well attended. There were four talks, covering
    Message 1 of 7 , Jul 25, 2005
      The only thing on Sunday was the two intro sessions. I hit the
      Engineering Practices session, which was very well attended. There
      were four talks, covering stories, planning, innovtion and Fit. Except
      for the last, I'm not at all sure I'd call any of them engineering
      practices - they're more in the project management space from where I sit.

      However, there were some really nice tidbits.

      I'm coming around to the idea of renaming "Executable Acceptance Test"
      to "Executable Story Test". The tests are tied to the stories, and it
      gets one more piece of terminology out of the confusion zone with
      classical testing and QA practice.

      There was also a note on changing "Test" to "Example". There's some
      reason, but I don't seem to be able to fit it onto a bumper sticker.
      Phrases welcome.

      Mike Cohn finally clarified the difference between points and ideal
      hours. It's precision - you use the lower precision points for lower
      precsion estimates, such as during the planning game, and the higher
      precision ideal hours when you're closer, such as the task breakdowns
      during iteration planning. Then in the daily standup you make
      committments: "I'm going to do this today."

      Jim Highsmith put up a great reporting chart from FDD (Feature Driven
      Development). It's simply several rows of boxes (with a couple of
      lines of text in each). Each box represents a feature consisting of
      several stories; some groups of boxes are outlined; presumably that
      represents higher level features or possibly different teams, or
      something.

      Complete boxes are backlighed in green, incomplete in blue, in trouble
      in red, and not started in white. As long as the organization stayed
      reasonably stable, this could be a great executive "status at a
      glance" reporting tool.

      The FIT presentation was good, but I personally think that fewer
      bullet points and more visuals would have helped.

      The icebreaker was originally scheduled for outdoors so we wouldn't
      conflict with the biker's convention, but the weather didn't
      cooperate. Lots of people in the Denver ballroom. Side note: the
      bikers were dressed better than we were [1].

      I finally got Rick Mugridge to say a few words about how he was
      planning to eliminate the fixture name from DoFixture, as well as a
      couple of other things. Could be some interesting changes coming up.

      And a discussion on how to do xUnit for Fortran, and on new and
      upcoming features for VersionOne.

      Looks like an exciting conference.

      John Roth

      [1] It was actually a Harley-Davidson dealer's sales convention.
    • Joshua Kerievsky
      ... Glad to hear that. One minor suggestion -- we actually call them storytests -- no space between story and test. (The new FIT got it right in some
      Message 2 of 7 , Jul 31, 2005
        jhrothjr wrote:

        >The only thing on Sunday was the two intro sessions. I hit the
        >Engineering Practices session, which was very well attended. There
        >were four talks, covering stories, planning, innovtion and Fit. Except
        >for the last, I'm not at all sure I'd call any of them engineering
        >practices - they're more in the project management space from where I sit.
        >
        >However, there were some really nice tidbits.
        >
        >I'm coming around to the idea of renaming "Executable Acceptance Test"
        >to "Executable Story Test". The tests are tied to the stories, and it
        >gets one more piece of terminology out of the confusion zone with
        >classical testing and QA practice.
        >
        >
        Glad to hear that. One minor suggestion -- we actually call them
        "storytests" -- no space between story and test. (The new FIT got it
        right in some places and wrong in others. Rick and Ward assure me
        they'll fix it in later printings of their book).

        --
        best regards,
        jk

        ----
        I n d u s t r i a l L o g i c , I n c .
        Joshua Kerievsky
        Founder, Industrial XP Coach
        http://industriallogic.com
        http://industrialxp.org
        866-540-8336 (toll free)
        510-540-8336 (phone)
        Berkeley, California
      • Ron Jeffries
        ... Hmm. Storytests . A new word. I can think of some advantages to that, I guess ... Ron Jeffries www.XProgramming.com If it is more than you need, it is
        Message 3 of 7 , Jul 31, 2005
          On Sunday, July 31, 2005, at 6:56:12 PM, Joshua Kerievsky wrote:

          > Glad to hear that. One minor suggestion -- we actually call them
          > "storytests" -- no space between story and test. (The new FIT got it
          > right in some places and wrong in others. Rick and Ward assure me
          > they'll fix it in later printings of their book).

          Hmm. "Storytests". A new word. I can think of some advantages to
          that, I guess ...

          Ron Jeffries
          www.XProgramming.com
          If it is more than you need, it is waste. -- Andy Seidl
        • Joshua Kerievsky
          ... Ron -- I invented that word back in 2003 to communicate the connection between tests and stories. I m surprised you haven t run across it before --
          Message 4 of 7 , Aug 1, 2005
            Ron Jeffries wrote:

            >On Sunday, July 31, 2005, at 6:56:12 PM, Joshua Kerievsky wrote:
            >
            >
            >
            >>Glad to hear that. One minor suggestion -- we actually call them
            >>"storytests" -- no space between story and test. (The new FIT got it
            >>right in some places and wrong in others. Rick and Ward assure me
            >>they'll fix it in later printings of their book).
            >>
            >>
            >
            >Hmm. "Storytests". A new word. I can think of some advantages to
            >that, I guess ...
            >
            >
            Ron -- I invented that word back in 2003 to communicate the connection
            between tests and stories. I'm surprised you haven't run across it
            before -- "storytesting" is a practice in IXP, as is SDD, which stands
            for storytest-driven development.

            --
            best regards,
            jk

            ----
            I n d u s t r i a l L o g i c , I n c .
            Joshua Kerievsky
            Founder, Industrial XP Coach
            http://industriallogic.com
            http://industrialxp.org
            866-540-8336 (toll free)
            510-540-8336 (phone)
            Berkeley, California
          • Ron Jeffries
            ... I have run across it. I was reflecting on the advantages, and dis, of coining a new word rather than a phrase ... Ron Jeffries www.XProgramming.com 2 + 2
            Message 5 of 7 , Aug 1, 2005
              On Monday, August 1, 2005, at 10:39:01 AM, Joshua Kerievsky wrote:

              >>Hmm. "Storytests". A new word. I can think of some advantages to
              >>that, I guess ...
              >>
              >>
              > Ron -- I invented that word back in 2003 to communicate the connection
              > between tests and stories. I'm surprised you haven't run across it
              > before -- "storytesting" is a practice in IXP, as is SDD, which stands
              > for storytest-driven development.

              I have run across it. I was reflecting on the advantages, and dis,
              of coining a new "word" rather than a phrase ...

              Ron Jeffries
              www.XProgramming.com
              2 + 2 = 5, for sufficiently large values of 2.
            • Chris Wheeler
              ... Our team has used the term storytest for a while, but to be honest, I prefer the term acceptance test because customer acceptance of the completed
              Message 6 of 7 , Aug 1, 2005
                >
                > > Ron -- I invented that word back in 2003 to communicate the connection
                > > between tests and stories. I'm surprised you haven't run across it
                > > before -- "storytesting" is a practice in IXP, as is SDD, which stands
                > > for storytest-driven development.
                >
                > I have run across it. I was reflecting on the advantages, and dis,
                > of coining a new "word" rather than a phrase ...
                >

                Our team has used the term storytest for a while, but to be honest, I prefer
                the term 'acceptance test' because customer acceptance of the completed
                feature, or story, is the most important part of the equation. Acceptance,
                as I've come to learn, is more than just having an automated storytest pass.


                Chris.


                ---------------------
                Chris Wheeler
                Extreme Programmer & Coach
                Visit my new site! http://www.agilelectric.com


                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • Joshua Kerievsky
                ... I usually come up with new names when I encounter issues with older name at client sites. At some of these sites, I found that QA and others had previous
                Message 7 of 7 , Aug 1, 2005
                  Chris Wheeler wrote:

                  >Our team has used the term storytest for a while, but to be honest, I prefer
                  >the term 'acceptance test' because customer acceptance of the completed
                  >feature, or story, is the most important part of the equation. Acceptance,
                  >as I've come to learn, is more than just having an automated storytest pass.
                  >
                  >
                  I usually come up with new names when I encounter issues with older name
                  at client sites. At some of these sites, I found that QA and others had
                  previous ideas of what an "acceptance test" is. Rather than fight them
                  about that, it's easier to use a new term. For a little while, I used
                  Brian Marrick's term, "customer test" in place of "acceptance test."
                  Then I found that I wanted something that more closely aligned the tests
                  with the stories. So that's how the term "storytest" came to be.
                  Meanwhile, the iteration posters we create have always contained an
                  "accepted" checkbox for each story. That box gets checked when
                  customers have decided that a story's implementation is acceptable.
                  Passing storytests is part of acceptance -- running the program and
                  observing what happens is another part. --jk

                  --
                  best regards,
                  jk

                  ----
                  I n d u s t r i a l L o g i c , I n c .
                  Joshua Kerievsky
                  Founder, Industrial XP Coach
                  http://industriallogic.com
                  http://industrialxp.org
                  866-540-8336 (toll free)
                  510-540-8336 (phone)
                  Berkeley, California
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.