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

Re: [XP] Re: auditing XP

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 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 2 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 3 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 4 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 5 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 6 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 7 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 8 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 9 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 10 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.