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

RE: [XP] Re: auditing XP

Expand Messages
  • Steven Gordon
    ... Code changes checked in, but no new unit tests checked in. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    Message 1 of 18 , Oct 1, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      > Refactoring - interview? code review?

      Code changes checked in, but no new unit tests checked in.


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Steven Gordon
      Whenever I document the time I spend at the request of management, I ALWAYS include an entry for the time I spent documenting the time I spent. You cannot
      Message 2 of 18 , Oct 1, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        Whenever I document the time I spend at the request of management, I ALWAYS include an entry for the time I spent documenting the time I spent. You cannot allow management to think your time is free.

        I agree with the second observation. Not only is there a bias because people tend to say what they think you want to hear, but introspection also tends to be a report of internal rationalizations and mental models, not what really occurred. But, I do not see a better solution.

        -----Original Message-----
        From: Ken Boucher [mailto:yahoo@...]
        Sent: Wed 10/1/2003 5:02 AM
        To: extremeprogramming@yahoogroups.com
        Cc:
        Subject: [XP] Re: auditing XP

        Personally, I really hate having to log everything I'm doing, but it
        just seems to be the nature of the business to spend a chunk of time
        documenting the time you spend on everything except the amount of
        time you spend documenting it.

        Honestly, the big problem I see is that most of the measurements
        you're getting are coming from interviews and logs, both of which are
        mostly consisting of people telling you what they want you to hear.




        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Ron Jeffries
        ... This is why most such practices require contemporaneous logs. Which, after much research, I find means log things as you do them, not at the end of the
        Message 3 of 18 , Oct 1, 2003
        • 0 Attachment
          On Wednesday, October 1, 2003, at 9:50:04 AM, Steven Gordon wrote:

          > Whenever I document the time I spend at the request of management, I ALWAYS include an entry for the time
          > I spent documenting the time I spent. You cannot allow management to think your time is free.

          > I agree with the second observation. Not only is there a bias because people tend to say what they think
          > you want to hear, but introspection also tends to be a report of internal rationalizations and mental
          > models, not what really occurred. But, I do not see a better solution.

          This is why most such practices require contemporaneous logs. Which, after
          much research, I find means "log things as you do them, not at the end of
          the day".

          Ron Jeffries
          www.XProgramming.com
          One never knows, do one? -- Fats Waller
        • Syver Enstad
          ... What about the time it takes to make a very simple application that uses a subset of the system? If the system has a simple design it should be relatively
          Message 4 of 18 , Oct 1, 2003
          • 0 Attachment
            yahoogroups@... writes:

            > > Simple Design - code review from repository?
            >
            > Code review is the only thing that comes to mind here.

            What about the time it takes to make a very simple application that
            uses a subset of the system? If the system has a simple design it
            should be relatively easy to instantiate a couple of system classes
            and make them do something.
          • Chris Hanson
            ... Since I do consulting work on a time-and-materials basis, I track my time to the quarter hour. However, I track my time *my* way using OmniOutliner, which
            Message 5 of 18 , Oct 1, 2003
            • 0 Attachment
              On Wednesday, October 1, 2003, at 07:02 AM, Ken Boucher wrote:
              > Personally, I really hate having to log everything I'm doing, but it
              > just seems to be the nature of the business to spend a chunk of time
              > documenting the time you spend on everything except the amount of
              > time you spend documenting it.

              Since I do consulting work on a time-and-materials basis, I track my
              time to the quarter hour. However, I track my time *my* way using
              OmniOutliner, which takes almost no time at all. If a client wants me
              to track my hours some other way, say by using some nasty web
              application or by filling out paper forms, then I do it that way too
              and bill for the time it takes.

              I've had cases where it would take me 30 to 60 minutes per week to
              enter my data into someone else's time tracking system. If they prefer
              I spend billable time that way rather than doing real work, I'm not
              going to argue with them. However, I'm perfectly up front with them
              that I consider the time billable, and let them make the decision with
              that in mind.

              -- Chris

              --
              Chris Hanson, bDistributed.com, Inc. | Email: cmh@...
              Custom Mac OS X Development | Phone: +1-847-372-3955
              http://bdistributed.com/ | Fax: +1-847-589-3738
              http://bdistributed.com/Articles/ | Personal Email: cmh@...
            • acockburn@aol.com
              In a message dated 10/1/2003 1:20:47 PM Mountain Daylight Time, Ralph Johnsonwrites:
              Message 6 of 18 , Oct 1, 2003
              • 0 Attachment
                In a message dated 10/1/2003 1:20:47 PM Mountain Daylight Time, Ralph
                Johnsonwrites:


                <<Alistair Cockburn says that it isn't possible to tell
                whether a group is doing XP from outside the group.
                I do it all the time.>>

                Hi, Ralph,

                1. Could you please publish here the rules or heuristics you use to determine
                whether or not they have followed XP?
                You may be the only person in the world who has reason enough to care whether
                a team actually did whatever you choose to think of as "XP". Therefore the
                evaluation mechanism you use is very important.

                2. My point wasn't that You don't know in your own mind whether they're doing
                XP (which is adequate for your course), or Ron doesn't know in his own mind
                (or I don't know in my own mind) whether they're doing XP, but that there isn't
                enough consensus to constitute meaning to the phrase, "This team is / isn't
                doing XP".

                3. Point #2 was effectively neutralized w.r.t. the CMMi question by those who
                pointed out that a team doesn't have to be observed to be doing "XP"
                (whatever that is), but only what they say they're doing. So with respect to CMMi,
                "This team is/isn't doing XP" is an irrelevant sentence (which is just as well,
                since I also think it's a meaningless sentence, except, possibly, in your
                course).

                4. Leading forward to a different question, if the sentence is both
                meaningless in utterance, and as many people here point out, also insignificant ("What
                do you care whether they are doing *real* XP --- the important question is
                whether the project is succeeding and people are happy?"), then what would make a
                decent response to the FAQ, "how can we tell if we're doing XP?"

                ==============================================
                Alistair Cockburn
                ==============================================


                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • acockburn@aol.com
                In a message dated 10/1/2003 1:20:47 PM Mountain Daylight Time, extremeprogramming@yahoogroups.com writes: In this context, I am reminded that long ago,
                Message 7 of 18 , Oct 1, 2003
                • 0 Attachment
                  In a message dated 10/1/2003 1:20:47 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
                  extremeprogramming@yahoogroups.com writes:
                  In this context, I am reminded that long ago, Alistair came to visit the C3
                  team. He commented later to the effect that he learned that the team
                  actually did the process that they and their management said that they did,
                  and if I recall, expressed some surprise, as this was rather an unusual
                  result.

                  So it seems that Alistair has forgotten how to determine whether teams are
                  doing what they claim to be doing, using an independent resource if need
                  be. I hope he kept good notes on how he used to do it, because it can be a
                  valuable ability when one is coaching. ;->
                  ---> At that time, "doing XP" had a meaning. Given the definition I was
                  handed, it wasn't just that they were doing what they said they would be doing,
                  they were doing "XP".

                  I remain in awe by that remarkable result.

                  Also by the fact that there was no brick falling onto the team's collect head
                  at that time.

                  (My audit wouldn't have worked for CMMi purposes, because I didn't check the
                  C3 processes for ensuring that the process was taught and followed ... only
                  that coincidentally it just happened to be being followed on the day I visited)

                  ==============================================
                  Alistair Cockburn
                  ==============================================


                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • acockburn@aol.com
                  In a message dated 10/1/2003 1:20:47 PM Mountain Daylight Time, Ron Jeffries writes: I think it works, but I have one big problem with the whole issue. I m
                  Message 8 of 18 , Oct 1, 2003
                  • 0 Attachment
                    In a message dated 10/1/2003 1:20:47 PM Mountain Daylight Time, Ron Jeffries
                    writes:
                    I think it works, but I have one "big" problem with the whole issue. I'm
                    not sure that it means anything to say "We are doing XP", or "We are doing
                    RUP" for that matter.
                    ---> sorry, I didn't spot this before putting in my similar sentence. It
                    appears Ron and I accidentally agree again (sorry, Ron)

                    ==============================================
                    Alistair Cockburn
                    ==============================================


                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • Ron Jeffries
                    ... I m sure it must be my mistake ... Ron Jeffries www.XProgramming.com You are closing your eyes to a situation you do not wish to acknowledge. --Professor
                    Message 9 of 18 , Oct 1, 2003
                    • 0 Attachment
                      On Wednesday, October 1, 2003, at 5:54:16 PM, acockburn@... wrote:

                      > In a message dated 10/1/2003 1:20:47 PM Mountain Daylight Time, Ron Jeffries
                      > writes:
                      > I think it works, but I have one "big" problem with the whole issue. I'm
                      > not sure that it means anything to say "We are doing XP", or "We are doing
                      > RUP" for that matter.
                      > ---> sorry, I didn't spot this before putting in my similar sentence. It
                      > appears Ron and I accidentally agree again (sorry, Ron)

                      I'm sure it must be my mistake ...

                      Ron Jeffries
                      www.XProgramming.com
                      You are closing your eyes to a situation you do not wish to acknowledge.
                      --Professor Harold Hill
                    • Ron Jeffries
                      ... Here are a few potentially decent responses, to be used in a context-dependent way. See Brad Appleton for details on how to be optimally context-dependent.
                      Message 10 of 18 , Oct 2, 2003
                      • 0 Attachment
                        On Wednesday, October 1, 2003, at 5:47:33 PM, acockburn@... wrote:

                        > 4. Leading forward to a different question, if the sentence is both
                        > meaningless in utterance, and as many people here point out, also insignificant ("What
                        > do you care whether they are doing *real* XP --- the important question is
                        > whether the project is succeeding and people are happy?"), then what would make a
                        > decent response to the FAQ, "how can we tell if we're doing XP?"

                        Here are a few potentially decent responses, to be used in a
                        context-dependent way. See Brad Appleton for details on how to be optimally
                        context-dependent.

                        ==========================================================================
                        "Well, if we knew whether we were doing XP, what use would we make of the
                        information?"
                        ==========================================================================
                        "Well, first of all, are you doing all of the XP practices all the time?"

                        If they say yes, next ask "How's that working for you?"
                        If they say no, next ask "How's that working for you?"
                        ==========================================================================
                        "1. Show me the team's Open Workspace.
                        2. I'd like to meet your Customer.
                        3. What stories are being done this iteration? Can I see the cards?
                        4. Tell me about your performance on acceptance tests.
                        5. When was your most recent release? When's the next one?
                        6. Here are some cards. Tell me about the system's design.
                        7. Let's go watch people program for a while.
                        8. How many classes, methods, lines of code do you have? How many test
                        classes, methods, assertions, lines? Have you tracked that over time?
                        9. Do you know what your unit test coverage is?
                        10. How do you handle defects coming in from the customers?
                        11. How are you doing on refactoring? Any changes? Why?
                        12. Tell me about who works on what code.
                        13. What kind of coding standards do you follow?
                        14. How often do you build the system? Do the builds always work?
                        15. When do you start your days, and end them? I'm staying over Saturday,
                        will there be anyone here to come talk to?"
                        ==========================================================================
                        "Hire Ron Jeffries to come in and tell you. It's the only way to be sure."
                        ==========================================================================

                        Ron Jeffries
                        www.XProgramming.com
                        For me, XP ain't out there, it's in here. -- Bill Caputo
                      • Ralph Johnson
                        Ron Jeffries had a bunch of ideas for checking that XP practices were being followed which are mostly more work than what we do, though they would be more
                        Message 11 of 18 , Oct 11, 2003
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Ron Jeffries had a bunch of ideas for checking that XP practices were being
                          followed which are mostly more work than what we do, though they would be
                          more accurate. We monitor a lot of projects, so we can't spend too much
                          time on each.

                          He also said:
                          > I think it works, but I have one "big" problem with the whole issue. I'm
                          > not sure that it means anything to say "We are doing XP", or "We are doing
                          > RUP" for that matter.
                          >
                          > We can certainly monitor, however, the extent to which the team is doing
                          > (or at least reporting) the XP practices, which is probably nearly good
                          > enough for a number of simple purposes:
                          >
                          > -- satisfying a CMM or ISO process check;
                          > -- finding out whether students are adhering to practices;
                          > -- detecting correlation between practice and result;
                          > -- detecting probable areas to measure and/or improve;

                          I define XP as doing the XP practices. Is there any other useful
                          definition?

                          Ken Boucher was pretty close when he said:

                          > Planning Game - interview?
                          Logs plus reports from customer.
                          > Small Releases - repository?
                          > Metaphor - interview?
                          > Simple Design - code review from repository?
                          The TAs and I read code. I don't know if this is what you mean by "code
                          review". It is impossible to be sure that students are doing the simplest
                          thing they can think of but it is easy to see unnecessary complexity. It
                          takes days or weeks for people to build infrastructure.

                          > Testing - repository? Interviews? some code tool?
                          We make sure there are automated tests and we count them and complain if
                          there don't seem to be very many. We usually don't make sure that tests are
                          written before code. When they aren't, usually code is checked in one day
                          and tests are checked in the next. It is theoretically possible for
                          students to write code and tests on the same day without writing tests
                          first, but not likely.

                          > Refactoring - interview? code review?
                          We read code and say "this needs to be refactored". Refactoring is one of
                          the practices students find hardest. Many of them look at bad code and
                          can't see that it needs to be refactored, or else can't see how. Most teams
                          have some people who can, and eventually that knowledge spreads, but it
                          takes awhile.

                          Steven Gordon <sagordon@...> suggested "Code changes checked in, but no
                          new unit tests checked in." This is a good idea, and we should look for it.

                          > Pair Programming - logs?
                          > Collective Code Ownership - interview? repository?
                          > Continuous Integration - repository?
                          > Sustainable Pace - logs?
                          > On-site Customer - interview?
                          Also logs. If the customer is a student then they will have a log. The
                          best customers are not in the class, of course. But all XP projects are
                          required to have a customer, and students find their own projects, so often
                          someone in the class is a customer.

                          > Coding Standards - code review? some code tool?
                          Also interview. "What are your coding standards?"

                          -Ralph Johnson
                        • Ron Jeffries
                          ... I d like to think that there is, though I confess I don t know what it might be. It seems awfully narrowly defined as Just the Pracs, Ma am. Is it still
                          Message 12 of 18 , Oct 11, 2003
                          • 0 Attachment
                            On Saturday, October 11, 2003, at 5:36:36 PM, Ralph Johnson wrote:

                            > I define XP as doing the XP practices. Is there any other useful
                            > definition?

                            I'd like to think that there is, though I confess I don't know what it
                            might be. It seems awfully narrowly defined as Just the Pracs, Ma'am.

                            "Is it still XP if we type the stories into Excel," etc.

                            Ron Jeffries
                            www.XProgramming.com
                            It's easier to act your way into a new way of thinking
                            than to think your way into a new way of acting. --Millard Fuller
                          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.