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

RE: [scrumdevelopment] X-Men or A-men? (Agile-Men)

Expand Messages
  • Mike Beedle
    ... The X-Men in me, really likes the attention XP gets. The A-Men in me, says likes to get his own comic strip, and his own super-hero movie :-) Oh, and a
    Message 1 of 7 , Sep 17, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      Ron writes:
      > Well, in that charming way I have, let me turn this idea on
      > its side just to see what it looks like ... basically I'm going
      > to suggest that regret might be an appropriate feeling but
      > that resentment is not.

      The X-Men in me, really likes the attention XP gets. The A-Men
      in me, says likes to get his own comic strip, and his
      own super-hero movie :-) Oh, and a model dressed in a Navy suit.

      Ron writes:
      > Transforming resentment to regret might, however help
      > generate activities that will get Scrum more of the
      > attention you rightly feel it deserves.

      > Or
      > I could be spouting nonsense. :)

      Thanks, Ron, now I feel resentment and regret :-), maybe it is
      me the one spouting nonsense .... More seriously, let me
      dress my feelings with that word in the next 24 hrs and see
      if that feels right.

      Ron writes:
      > If I choose to write an article about aerobic exercise, are you
      > going to be resentful because I don't say all the potential
      > good things about diet?

      Ah, but the article was about the "ongoing revolution",
      not only about XP. That's the problem: the touting,
      the exaggeration, the misunderstanding, the abuse,
      the lack of investigation of previous art, the misinformation,
      the lack of foundation, etc.; she could have at least
      thrown some statistics (they tend to be better lies).


      Ron writes:
      > Yes, well, I want to suggest that XP may well be the
      > main agent of change.

      Do we know that? For all I know, there might be more
      Scrum projects than XP projects. Scrum might be the
      "main agent of change" :-)

      The above might actually be a true statement.

      Therefore, it is hard to pass these statements as true:

      Software development is undergoing a dramatic
      change with the advent of extreme programming (XP),
      in which programmers o-develop code, thus
      shortening the development loop and eliminating
      lengthy upfront planning periods typical of traditional,
      isolated programming.

      XP is expected to eradicate the chronic tardiness
      that afflicts all but 18 percent of IT
      projects, according to an annual Standish Group survey, and
      significantly reduce the rollout of consistently buggy
      software.

      My built-in LogicTest framework says on statement 1) false.
      There are other important contributors; and on statement 2) false.
      very exaggerated prediction conflicting with statement 1.

      Ron writes:
      > And had we not flinched when we were being blackmaixxxxxxxx
      > talked into renaming XP Universe, it might have even more.

      Perhaps, but now we have a better more diverse agile universe :-)

      I don't know anything about the blackmai******. I thought
      it was simply a friendly gesture from a amicable tribe.

      Ron writes:
      > I'm not saying that would have been a good thing,
      > just that it might have been a thing. I think the agile
      > community would be stronger were we more integrated
      > instead of going around killing each others babies.

      I am certainly not trying to kill any babies. I like XP,
      I sponsor XP, as well as Scrum, but I like truths to be told --
      even about babies (or babes when appropriate :-).

      Ron writes:
      > Jim Highsmith has the right idea: CMM and UP are the enemy.)

      I am not sure we need CMM and UP as "enemies". We could
      simply choose:

      Software Project Failure(s)

      as our collective enemy. That would avoid confrontations
      but almost always include many CMM and UP projects. Actually,
      as far as I know they already "joined" in lip-service
      mode, claiming "they have always been on this side of the fence".

      Well, perhaps this is a good opportunity to actually
      change their ways :-)

      (The "Mike Beedle" of 6 months ago, would have been
      incapable of writing the above sentences. Surely
      some neurogenesis has occurred within my political cortex.)

      Mike B. wrote:
      >> The statements above even credit XP with a futuristic
      >> "silver bullet" of fixing the tardiness of all other
      >> software projects.
      Ron writes:
      > The paragraph does suggest that XP eliminates tardiness. In my
      > experience, it does. There may be other ways. She's writing
      > about this one.

      Ah, but it is not an article about XP. It is an article that
      explains how:

      "Software development is undergoing a dramatic
      change with the advent of extreme programming (XP) ...."

      in her own words. That's the first sentence of the article.
      (I should have been a lawyer like my father, I probably would
      have made a lot more money that way ;-), but hey I am an
      "agile developer" at heart.)


      Mike B. wrote:
      > But many of these "biggest advantages" are also fundamental
      > in other agile methods... like Scrum.

      Ron wrote:
      > Uh, gee, I think that's not the case at all. Scrum does not
      > specify instant feedback and continuous testing, its small releases
      > are at least twice as far apart as XP's, and perhaps 20 times,
      > Scrum does not have a metaphor practice or a simple design
      > practice, it does not specify refactoring, it does not specify
      > pair programming, it does not specify continuous integration,
      > and so on.

      Oh, perhaps not in a the one limited Scrum book (I hear it is
      a good book, btw), or the couple of web sites, but Scrum
      "in practice" has had many of these things from
      its early start. Most certainly:

      - instant feedback (minute-by-minute feedback, daily
      feedback, Sprint feedback, ... we should have
      called it "Layered Feedback" not Scrum !!!)

      - continuous testing (You should have seen Jeff
      Sutherland TIAC site and presentation in 1996. He
      talked about regression testing a lot back then, and
      we practiced that, of course. I think controlchaos.com
      still ahs some of that material on-line.)

      - Small Releases. yes, we do at least one Daily Customer Build

      - Continuous Integration. oh yes, again even Jeff Sutherland's
      TIAC site in 1996 talked about this, and I believe even
      early versions of controlchaos.com in 1996/1997 had lots
      about that

      I admit that Scrum never documented the "simple design",
      "refactoring", and or "pairing" practices, but I think it
      always implicitly operated that way anyhow. Most Scrumers
      do these things naturally.

      And no, Scrum doesn't have the "metaphor" practice, but
      I know very few people in the XP camp that actually practice this
      practice :-)

      Ron wrote:
      > Scrum is silent on those issues. That can be an advantage,
      > as you well know, because Scrum can play in areas where XP
      > can't be sold. However, it also opens the need for things like
      > XBreed and XP@Scrum, which bring in various selected useful
      > practices in areas where Scrum is silent.

      Perhaps XP@Scrum does. XBreed is about managing multiple
      concurrent agile projects not simply a mixture of
      single-project practices.

      Ron wrote:
      > The other agile methods are also largely silent on the
      > practices about which XP is so explicit, with some benefits
      > -- easier to fit in -- and some drawbacks -- not so clear
      > what to really do.

      True.


      Mike B wrote:
      > > Do you see now why someone outside the XP camp may get
      > > resentful? XP is the prima donna among agile methods.
      Ron wrote:
      > Yes, XP is the most well known among agile methods. That is in
      > part due to the efforts of so many people in talking about it
      > in so many forums. It is in part due to the specificity
      > of its practices. And it is in part due to sheer luck.

      True. XPers did a great job about documentation.

      We, Scrumers, should follow that example.

      Ron wrote:
      > I wouldn't necessarily claim that XP is the best of the
      > agile methods. I might be willing to claim that for projects
      > of size up to about 50 people, it's the most complete. And
      > I would definitely use XBreed and XP@Scrum as evidence of
      > that completeness.

      No doubt, XP is the most complete(ly) documented agile method.
      But I would claim that Scrum in practice is equally complete.

      Mike B wrote:
      > The only positive thing I see with articles like this is
      > that they keep transmitting the message:
      >
      > there is NEW thing and it is worthwhile looking at it
      >
      > Hopefully many will go looking and then discover at least
      > XP.
      >
      > I would prefer if they would expose "agile" -- it would be more
      > accurate, imnsho,


      Ron wrote:
      > I generally try to use the word agile as frequently as I can,
      > in part because it will fly in places where the word XP will
      > not. I like the manifesto values and principles that you
      > and I and the others put together, as an expression of what
      > we're about.

      Thanks. I think that is fair.

      For us, Scrumers, it is easier to "Stay Agile!" than to
      "Stay Scrumy!" ;-)


      Ron wrote:
      > This young lady chose to write about XP. I rather
      > like the article, while some XPers, including at least one
      > major one, hated it.

      If she had written about XP only I would be ok with
      the article. What heated my blood was the exaggerations,
      the misinformation, and the lack of "previous art" references.
      I am actually glad that at least XP is getting the
      attention, even though is running with some extra credits
      it hardly deserves. (It is like having your twin brother
      acing an exam and turning into valedictorian but knowing that
      you gave him half of the answers. This last statement
      is surely nonsense... metaphors are hard.)

      Ron wrote:
      > I can suggest some ways to do it. A thousand pages on wiki
      > and a couple of thousand pages of books would be two of
      > them. That's how XP did it.

      Some of us keep working at it :-)

      - Mike

      Now to the "sigs" discussion.

      Mike B. wrote:
      > "Our immortality will be a matter of being sufficiently careful to
      > make frequent backups." Ray Kurzweil

      Ron responded:
      > I expect that after I die, my backup will feel really happy
      > when we boot it up. I don't expect that to comfort me while
      > I lie suffering in my final bed of pain.

      But would it be you down in the bed? Is you, your physical
      you? your mind? your consciousness? your soul? The
      likely answer is all of the above as far as we know today.

      But within the next 10 years we will be able to save
      exact neural net replicas of our minds to persistence, and
      possibly within the next 30 years we might attain
      "artificial consciousness" through robotic extensions.

      What is then _you_?

      Moreover, in the next 50-100 years we will be able to use
      gene treatment to manipulate the growth and characteristics
      of any human tissue, you could then simply "fix yourself
      through gene drugs and live forever", "enhance yourself
      through gene drugs" -- if you can afford it, or download
      an image of your mind to another physical or artificial
      brain or being, and _be_ there as an invited or uninvited
      guest.

      But what then would it be _you_?

      Mike B. wrote:
      > "What you do you want to be today?"
      > MB
      Ron responded:
      > Excellent question. Worth contemplating.

      I don't mean just "what saved or altered image of you
      do you want to run today?", of course :-)

      Even among all options above it makes sense to ask:

      "What you do you want to be today?"
      Mike B.

      Certainly not one that _steals_ credits from others....

      Even a downloaded image of self, wouldn't want to
      do that.

      Ron responded:
      > Best and fondest regards,

      Likewise. It was fun.
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.