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

Re: [XP] Whats in a name?

Expand Messages
  • William Pietri
    Sorry for the delay; I was away from email for a long weekend and am still digging out. ... The people I ve chatted with have ended up fragmenting the one team
    Message 1 of 14 , Apr 27, 2004
      Sorry for the delay; I was away from email for a long weekend and am
      still digging out.

      On Fri, 2004-04-23 at 02:09, Ron Jeffries wrote:
      > On Friday, April 23, 2004, at 12:26:14 AM, William Pietri wrote:
      > > I've never heard of a team above that size that sticks with by-the-book
      > > XP. Do they exist? I know some have tried, but the ones I've talked to
      > > have always ended up adapting things in ways that reduce communication
      > > cost.
      > Examples please?

      The people I've chatted with have ended up fragmenting the one team into
      multiple teams, either in a traditionally rigid way or in ways that are
      more dynamic, where sub-team size changes from iteration to iteration.
      For more details, best that others chime in; I've only interviewed or
      observed teams like that; I've never participated extensively in them.

      > And what does "stick with by-the-book XP" mean? Does /anyone/ stick with
      > by-the-book XP? Is XP "do these 12 things and no otherss"?

      Well, that was my point. I had the impression that Dominic was saying
      that base XP, which I interpret as something pretty similar to what Kent
      described in the white book, should be sufficient for most everybody. I
      believe that thanks to the vigorous experimentation that is part of XP,
      there has been evolution in the notion that is not captured in a way
      that is easily accessible to outsiders.

      I think branded XP variants are a natural response to the lack of a
      clear answer to the "What is XP?" question. Although I deeply appreciate
      the folly of trying to answer the "Are they really doing XP if..."
      question, I also recognize that many people new to XP need a clear,
      simple introduction that addresses their concerns and gives them a tidy
      package to start with. Otherwise a lot of them will just scratch their
      heads and go back to their tried, albeit untrue, methods.

      I'd rather that there were a clear, broadly accepted, evolving answer to
      the "What is XP?" question, but then again I like the feeling of
      community that goes with that. Where I think we're headed now is to more
      of a "thousand flowers" approach: In ten years every significant process
      will incorporate the essentials of XP. Some of them will include some
      variant on the name, and some won't. But XP itself will be seen mainly
      as an historical artifact, like the IBM PC.


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