RE: [scrumdevelopment] mention of Scrum in "Software Development"
- (responding to Joseph)
> With all the "new" variant methodologies out there, itI'm a dedicated mix-and-matcher. What I'm trying to do
> reminds me of going to a Chinese restaurant -
> mix-and-match, choose only what you like, take
> one from Column A and one from Column B etc.
is devise a way of keeping the score, and then amass
a load of 'cheat' rules so people can get high scores.
Yes, it would be great if they got high scores from sheer
talent... there must be ways for folk to get better
> Also, I dare say that the proliferation of methods isI dare say I'm guilty of that, too. I'm sure Scott has good
> partially caused by people looking for the small cage
> where they can be the 800-pound gorilla...
things to offer, and I think I have good things to offer.
Do you have anything fundamentally against mix and
match, or is your worry that it is being done prescriptively
rather than rule-based?
I'm really here to learn about Scrum. (before writing
about it ;-) )Yell at me if I get too far off topic.
any opinions expressed herein are not necessarily those of
Mentors of Cally or the Appropriate Process Movement
- While I agree with Mike in general, it is of interest that the first Scrum
was building an OOAD tool and we decided the team should eat their own
dogfood. It was also the first round trip engineering tool.
Every developer had the model of his components on his wall.
Our senior consultant, Jeff McKenna, an ace Smalltalker, would walk into a
cube and an hour later the model was in shreds on the floor. He had shown
the developer how to refactor the model and eliminate half the code while
enhancing performance and functionality.
I've never seen another team that can operate at that level.
At 05:07 AM 11/14/2003, Mike Beedle wrote:
> > Mike has said repeatedly that he feels that
> > modeling isn't necessary in order to produce quality code. Scott
> > Ambler, myself, and some within the XP community have the opinion that
> > modeling, when necessary, and to the proper level of detail and
> > formality, provides an important element in the design and
> > implementation of software.
>This is also a fact:
> We produce hyper-productive, high-octane, high-quality,
> high-quantity software with little or no models.
>So no, models are not important to us, as they are not as
>important to most agile developers. (We minimize "documentation time"
>by documenting after the fact.)
>But like I said earlier, if you feel modeling helps your team, or
>is needed for political reasons, or you like how the models look on
>display on the walls, hey, more power to you.
>Good luck with all of your projects!!!!
>(It was nice to talk to you on the phone earlier this evening, btw.)
> > P.S. I'm looking forward to taking the CSM course some time in the
> > near future. Perhaps I'll walk away cured of my modeling sickness. :-)
>In 1994-1996 I was involved in a 100+ person, 30 million dollar
>software development project. By year 2 we had 1000+ pages of:
> Elaborated Use Cases
> Class Package Diagrams
> Class Diagrams
> Sequence Diagrams
> Test Plans
>but no working software. Within the last 4 months of the project
>I took over the project, *ignored all the previous models*,
>applied Scrum to the project and delivered the first instance
>of the application to production on 1/1/1996.
>(I have many other, almost countless experiences like that.)
>This is why I don't do models anymore -- they NEVER delivered the
>goods for me in the trenches.