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

41748Re: [scrumdevelopment] Re: Technical quality advocator

Expand Messages
  • Kurt Häusler
    Oct 7, 2009
      On Wed, Oct 07, 2009 at 09:00:57AM -0000, Inanc Gumus wrote:
      > My original question actually is: Who should coach the team to produce quality code? If there is no one, than if the whole team believes in pragmatism, what should we do if they produce defectful work?

      For the first question, you could hire a consultant to coach the team to
      improve their quality, or if you have strong QA people (not QC or testers),
      then they could work with the developers to help with quality issues.

      For the second question, I understand "defectful", or defective work to be work that
      doesn't meet the requirements without visible defects. In this case, it
      should simply not be accepted by the PO. If however by defectful you mean
      software that does meet all acceptance criteria, without any visible
      defects, but is a maintenance nightmare, and suffers from poor internal
      quality, then that is where a strong QA person in a management role is
      required. There is no scrum role for that, as I guess scrum assumes
      quality-aware developers, so I would consider
      them a team member as far as scrum goes.

      But without such a role there is no incentive to clear away some of the
      excess duct tape. The PO cannot even see it, so cannot be expected to be
      concerned with anything beyond seeing his acceptance criteria being passed
      without visible defects. A year later he might, when stories that used to
      take a couple of hours end up taking a couple of weeks, but until then, if
      the developers cannot get their duct tape aka technical debt aka crap in
      order, then you need to hire someone who can help them with that.
    • Show all 24 messages in this topic