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

Re: [scrumdevelopment] Re: Burn Up Charts

Expand Messages
  • Ron Jeffries
    ... In my experience, the date is almost always the most important thing, in spite of the fact that I have only worked on one project in my entire life where
    Message 1 of 64 , Apr 3, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      On Wednesday, April 2, 2003, at 3:34:35 PM, Phil Goodwin wrote:

      > It seems to me that time is also negotiable. It makes sense to limit the
      > amount of work scheduled for an iteration to the the amount indicated by
      > the current velocity times the duration of the iteration. But, I don't
      > think that it makes sense to limit the number of iterations in the
      > project by assigning a fixed ship date.

      In my experience, the date is almost always the most important thing, in
      spite of the fact that I have only worked on one project in my entire life
      where the date chosen had any basis in reality. I believe that the wise
      thing to do for most teams is to plan for a fixed delivery date and to use
      scope control to hit that date exactly, with the best possible running
      software (which has been shipped every two weeks all along, but this is the
      one everyone will care about).

      > On a pure XP project I don't think that the developers ever have to care
      > about the ship date because their behavior won't change because of it.

      If you do it perfectly, yes, this should be true. Perfection has been
      granted only to a lucky few of us, so I would expect that most projects
      would in fact be doing things a bit differently in final iterations.

      Ron Jeffries
      www.XProgramming.com
      Only the hand that erases can write the true thing. -- Meister Eckhart
    • Dave Hoover
      Mike, ... Agreed! ... I think we struggle with researching previous art because most of the leading agile thinkers are in the trenches, not in academia.
      Message 64 of 64 , Apr 12, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        Mike,

        > I think it is fine to assume that it is "independent
        > thinking". This is a good thing because it confirms
        > that at least 2 people can reach the same conclusions
        > and can validate their experiences and explain
        > the world the same way.

        Agreed!

        > (You could always
        > ask the question the other way: Is the stuff
        > from "Growing Software" coming from somewhere else
        > since our stuff was published 5-7 years ago
        > i.e. PLOP3 proceedings, PLOPD4 book, etc. I think
        > it is safe to assume "independent thinking" because
        > our industry is famous for not researching
        > "previous art". In hard Science this would actually
        > be an embarrassment.)

        I think we struggle with researching "previous art" because most of the
        leading agile thinkers are in the trenches, not in academia. This is why I was
        excited when I saw the overlap between the Scrum book and "Growing
        Software". I figured that both the Scrum folks and Roy had probably not had
        the opportunity to find each other.

        I look forward to the outcome of future collaborations between agile thinkers
        who find complexity science applicable to software development.

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