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

Re: Do people prefer to fail than to admit a paradigm change?( or is XP a poisoned term? )

Expand Messages
  • Ken Boucher
    ... No. It adds much value to a project. And yet it s often tossed and tossed hard. I suspect it s an advanced practice, requiring more disipline than a team
    Message 1 of 75 , Nov 1, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      >> *Sustainable Pace - already changed from 40 hour week. Often the
      >> first practice to go by the wayside when things go bad, which is
      >> probably precisely the time it ought to be followed.
      >
      > I don't understand this one. Maybe I'm connecting the dots
      > incorrectly. Are you saying that Sustainable Pace adds little or
      > no value to a project?

      No. It adds much value to a project. And yet it's often tossed and
      tossed hard. I suspect it's an "advanced" practice, requiring more
      disipline than a team new to XP is prepared to give. I would move
      Sustainable Pace to a catagory of advanced practices that it's
      reccomended that teams adopt after they have had sucess with XP.

      > I interpreted this differently. I pictured them saying that, in an
      > environment that seems hostile to XP, these are the practices worth
      > fighting for just to get your foot in the door. The rest have less
      > ROI when you include the effort you spend trying to convince
      > people in the "expense" column.
      >
      > I don't think they mean that the remaining practices are candidates
      > to discard on an XP project with the appropriate buy-in.

      And yet buy-in is often listed as the cause of failure of XP
      projects. Apparently we're very good at measuring buy-in after the
      project has failed, but not good at measuring it up front or on a
      regualr basis. If we can do such a measurement, I suggest we do. If
      we can't then we don't know if we have the appropriate buy-in for the
      other practices until it's too late.
    • Roy Miller
      ... Programming ... 12 ... ROI ... the ... to ... Consider this confirmation, at least from me. Please do use all the practices when you can, but John s right.
      Message 75 of 75 , Nov 28, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        > >>Ken Auer and Roy Miller propose in their book ("Extreme
        Programming
        > >>Applied", page 71), that although it is better to start with all
        12
        > >>above mentioned practices, it is also feasable to start with only
        > >>the following 6 practices. Ken and Roy call them essential
        > >>practices.
        > >
        > >>Planning Game
        > >>Small Releases
        > >>Testing
        > >>Pair Programming
        > >>Refactoring
        > >>Continuous Integration
        >
        > I interpreted this differently. I pictured them saying that, in an
        > environment that seems hostile to XP, these are the practices worth
        > fighting for just to get your foot in the door. The rest have less
        ROI
        > when you include the effort you spend trying to convince people in
        the
        > "expense" column.
        >
        > I don't think they mean that the remaining practices are candidates
        to
        > discard on an XP project with the appropriate buy-in.
        >
        > Of course, Ken or Roy could just confirm or deny that themselves.

        Consider this confirmation, at least from me. Please do use all the
        practices when you can, but John's right. You sometimes need to pick
        your battles. Win the first set of battles, then move on to the next
        set. I think you'll like the results.

        Roy
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.