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

RE: [scrumdevelopment] Re: Valid uses of this list (was: RUP andAgile)

Expand Messages
  • Jeff Langr
    ... Thanks Clint. Nice try, but I m a mortal too. :-) I have no use for Scrum 2.0 types of arguments, either. You re right, it s a thin line, but it s
    Message 1 of 3 , Dec 1, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Quoting Clinton Keith <ckeith@...>:

      > From: Jeff Langr
      >> I too joined it to figure out how to "build products and
      >> software using Scrum," and "discussion on how to do so."
      >> Unfortunately, since Scrum answers only part of the challenge,
      >> such discussion would necessarily need to involve other
      >> process. Not religious debate, mind you, but open discussion
      >> about techniques.
      >
      > The dividing line between topics like "using XP with Scrum" on one side
      > and "changing Scrum" or "creating Scrum 2.0", etc on the other is very
      > thin. As a relative newcomer to Scrum I am using the practices of Scrum
      > while trying to understand the principles and values behind it.
      > Discussions about how RUP can mesh with Scrum might be worth a link, but
      > not 40 messages IMO. These discussions seem relevant to the
      > methodologists, consultants and other "high-power thinkers" that gave us
      > Scrum, XP, etc to begin with but from my perspective they dilute the
      > value of this list as stated in its scope.
      >
      > Give us mortals a break and throw your thunderbolts up in the clouds!
      > :)

      Thanks Clint. Nice try, but I'm a mortal too. :-)

      I have no use for "Scrum 2.0" types of arguments, either. You're
      right, it's a thin line, but it's usually a safer route to err on the
      side of too much information. I agree, 40 messages is a bit much
      (particularly since the thread was spawned by someone who apparently
      posted on the wrong list in the first place).

      It's easy to ignore a thread. It's also possible for moderators to
      gently promote wrapping up a thread without being heavy-handed.
      Scaring off the thinkers can relegate a list to not much more value
      than a FAQ.

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