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

Re: [XP] Re: Shouldnt done include everything.

Expand Messages
  • Ron Jeffries
    Hello, Curtis. On Thursday, June 3, 2010, at 2:31:07 PM, you ... True ... and it helps to know that it is possible, rather than know that it is impossible.
    Message 1 of 49 , Jun 3, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      Hello, Curtis. On Thursday, June 3, 2010, at 2:31:07 PM, you
      wrote:

      > Code up to the end of the iteration, trusting it's releasable? Um, well,
      > wow. That's kind of a big step. What if there's bugs? What if it's not
      > ready? We better test it for a while first, just to be sure.

      > Perhaps the team just needs to get better at XP before they can take that
      > final step, but each retrospective should address readiness for that step.
      > When the iteration comes when the testers don't have anything to do those
      > last few days, it'll start to click.

      True ... and it helps to know that it is possible, rather than
      "know" that it is impossible.

      Ron Jeffries
      www.XProgramming.com
      www.xprogramming.com/blog
      The work teaches us. -- Richard Gabriel
    • Adam Sroka
      Hi Jeff: Are you responding to what Tim wrote below? Or to one of the earlier messages that I wrote? Anyway, thanks ;-) On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 3:52 PM, Jeff
      Message 49 of 49 , Jun 9, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        Hi Jeff:

        Are you responding to what Tim wrote below? Or to one of the earlier
        messages that I wrote?

        Anyway, thanks ;-)

        On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 3:52 PM, Jeff Anderson
        <Thomasjeffreyandersontwin@...> wrote:
        >
        >
        >
        > Adam
        >
        > Your description of your coding life cycle was a breath of fresh air,
        > I sometimes get so surrounded by the old schoolers that I forget how
        > profound and powerful the XP approach is.
        >
        > Bravo.
        >
        > On 6/9/10, Tim Ottinger <linux_tim@...> wrote:
        > > FWIW
        > >
        > > My current company (an awesome place) is two years into agile transition.
        > > They are still releasing by content rather than time, mostly because it
        > > hasn't sunk in to upper levels the way it has been embraced in lower levels.
        > >
        > > There is a large legacy code base still, though it is constantly being
        > > whittled down. It has less coverage than the newer code.
        > >
        > > The ideal we strive for is that someday release will be a nonevent. There
        > > are many versions of our software in git that have had a full batch of
        > > unit and automated acceptance tests. Eventually, we will have sufficient
        > > trust in them that we can release any of them at any time. That's when
        > > we have arrived.
        > >
        > > While the code base and product management haven't fully transitioned, we
        > > have a 'code freeze' (really a branchpoint, after which we continue on) and
        > > there is manual testing and exploratory testing before a release. We are
        > > not really blocked by it, and we are programming on the day of release (on
        > > the next release).
        > >
        > > But someday a release will be a total non-event. Someone will pick a release
        > > package from the CI system and run the automated deploy on it in our big
        > > SAAS farm and nobody will stay up late or worry about it. Until then, we
        > > have the ever-thinning vestiges of an earlier circumstance.
        > >
        > > Tim Ottinger
        > > http://agileinaflash.blogspot.com/
        > > http://agileotter.blogspot.com/
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        >
        > --
        > Sent from my mobile device
        >
        > Jeff Anderson
        >
        > http://agileconsulting.blogspot.com/
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.