RE: [scrumdevelopment] RUP and Agile
- (responding to Mike V)
> One thing I learned in this thread was Scott AmblerThat doesn't seem right to me. I seem to remember he
> is banned now from this group. So that voice will
> now go unheard and any of those discussions do not
> seem like an option here.
joined when Ken was comparing methodologies and
reporting unfavourably on his work. I've nothing
(much) against the latter, as long as we can all do it.
Am I allowed that much of a dissenting opinion?
Our e-mail domain has now changed from iraspire.com to hmrcaspire.com. Please update your address books.
- On Fri Dec 1, 2006 Stephen Gordon wrote:
>Where does this analogy to the daily scrum come from?Those of us practicing Scrum on a daily basis, who look to this list for
>The analogy to a sprint/release/project retrospective is much closer,
>but virtually everyone here is a chicken with respect to whoever is
>posting their question, so either analogy means we could say nothing
practical answers to their daily questions and actually implement ideas
that they read her as part of their ongoing process of continual
improvement, are pigs with regards to the health and continued value of
this list. As Ken has explained, much of this RUP discussion was driven
by people who don't practice Scrum and have some financial interest in
diverting the attention of this group.
>This list is among the most active online agile communities and isI agree with your assessment of the success of this group, but disagree
>discussing some of the most important issues in agile software
>development. This community has thrived both here both because Scrum
>has become the kernel of agile software development and because there
>has been little if any explicit regulation of conversation.
entirely with your assessment of the cause of that success. This group
is successful because Scrum works, delivers what it promises and this
group is THE place to get quality information and advice on using Scrum.
Oh yeah, and Ken hangs out here.
>I am afraid that this late attempt to provide regulation will harmWhat a crock! Since when did keeping the discussion within some
>this community. And I just do not see why is it even necessary? Just
>because the discussion is a little too chaordic for a few newbies?
>People looking for cut-and-dried robotic answers are ultimately not
>going to find Scrum to their liking anyway. Newbies are going to need
>to learn how to filter and adapt to constructive chaos pretty quickly
>to make Scrum work in most environments. Any newby who cannot handle
>that should just be reading static FAQs instead of this list.
reasonable bounds equate to giving only "cut-and-dried robotic answers"?
Personally, I don't think I'd consider myself a newbie. I've been
running Scrum day in and day out for over two years now. I get this
list in digest form, because dealing with 50-100 posts a day is a bit
much. So I skim the digests, and try to hone in on the the stuff that
might be relevant to me at work. Thousands of lines of posts dealing
with a dead issue like RUP just makes it less likely I'll notice
something of real interest to me.
Why don't you put all the stuff comparing RUP to Scrum in a static FAQ
so the rest of us can ignore it, and get on talking about Scrum?
Lawyers' Professional Indemnity Company