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

341RE: [scrumdevelopment] RE: [XP] Scrum and XP

Expand Messages
  • Lowell Lindstrom
    May 15, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      > We use a different names for 2 main reasons:
      > 1) out of respect for what XP and Scrum are,
      > because we don't like to say that we do is
      > XP or Scrum and then have someone pointing out
      > that XP or Scrum don't do things like we do.

      I can definitely see wanting to avoid the "are you doing XP(Scrum)? debate."
      But you are doing XP and Scrum, plus MORE. What's interesting is the "more"
      part, that variance, not the XP and Scrum. That is where the attention
      should be. Naming the superset distracts from that.

      > 2) and because we like to remember,
      > "special combinations" that lead to a desired
      > specialized result. In the case of XP@Scrum
      > is business value, and in the case of XBreed
      > is reusability. So we abstract these special
      > combinations with a name rather than tell people:

      Thanks! I understand a little better. Somehow I missed that each had a
      different emphasis. I was under the impression that they were both simply
      different combinations of XP and Scrum.

      The name proliferation seems not agile to me. It introduces unnecessary
      complexity. Surely XBreed projects want business value and XP@Scrum
      projects want reuse. A better approach is to emphasize only what is unique,
      rather than the rename the whole set. What are the set of practices that
      when added to what we know as Scrum and XP lead to higher reuse? That is a
      set of practices that warrants a new label, not the superset. Same with
      XP@Scrum. What are the practices that when added to what we know as Scrum
      and XP deliver higher business value? Call that XP@Scrum (or BVD). If it
      is just XP, with Scrum replacing the planning game, just call it "XP with
      Scrum as the Planning Game" or "Scrum using XP Practices for the software

      > In terms of names consider this: Monkeys and Humans have
      > a x > 99% overlap in their chromosome and gene sequences,
      > yet, this difference yields to very different animals.
      > However, as much as we are alike I don't think there
      > is any human that likes to be called a monkey

      Nicely phrased! Yes, I am aware that egos are involve here ;-). I just hope
      they can be kept in check enough not to kill the movement. A proliferation
      of differently names sets of methods that are basically identical has that
      risk associated with it.


      Lowell Lindstrom
      Object Mentor, Inc | www.objectmentor.com | 1-800-338-6716
    • Show all 20 messages in this topic