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

RE: [XP] Scrum and XP

Expand Messages
  • Lowell Lindstrom
    I can t seem to find a substantial difference between the XP Planning Game and Scrum. There are subtle differences, but if the team is adapting their work as
    Message 1 of 20 , May 13, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      I can't seem to find a substantial difference between the XP Planning Game
      and Scrum. There are subtle differences, but if the team is adapting their
      work as they proceed, I can't see why I starting with one versus the other
      would have make any difference in the outcome of the project.

      I can see how Scrum would be a way to move towards XP in a "non-XP-friendly"
      environment or simply a way to be Agile, if I not using XP programming
      practices.

      If I am in an "XP-friendly" environment, I would not want to complicate
      things by introducing Scrum terminology for project management, which is
      largely redundant to the Planning Game.



      > -----Original Message-----
      > From: kschwaber [mailto:ken.schwaber@...]
      > Sent: Monday, May 13, 2002 2:00 PM
      > To: extremeprogramming@yahoogroups.com
      > Subject: [XP] Scrum and XP
      >
      >
      > On May 12, Ron Jefferies wrote:
      >
      > >> What does Scrum seem to have that XP does not? It seems to me that
      > >> Scrum is a subset of XP.
      >
      > I used to think that XP was a subset of Scrum until I understood XP
      > better. Then I understood that Scrum is a set of business and project
      > management practices, XP is a set of engineering practices. They both
      > use iterations, increments, emergence, self-organization, and
      > collaboration, so I've been able to use each of them to make up for
      > what the other doesn't address.
      >
      > Ken Schwaber
      >
    • andycirillo
      I won t attempt to answer your question because I m kind of wondering the same thing (except that my version is Isn t the XP planning game just a scaled-down
      Message 2 of 20 , May 14, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        I won't attempt to answer your question because I'm kind of wondering
        the same thing (except that my version is 'Isn't the XP planning game
        just a scaled-down version of Scrum?')

        I would like to make a few comments in support of Scrum however:

        1. Scrum is scalable. There are precedents for having Scrums of
        Scrums of Scrums, which is critical if you want to use agile methods
        across an organization, or on very large teams.

        2. I think the Scrum concept of a backlog is more sophisticated than
        anything on the XP side. The flow from Product Backlog to Version
        Backlog to Sprint Backlog gives you a nice clean way to manage a
        product roadmap without sacrificing flexibility.

        3. Scrum is something that professional managers can relate to.
        These guys don't care about continuous integration or unit testing.
        XP is largely outside of their world, which means that they will have
        a hard time relating to development. Scrum is something they can
        sink their teeth into, and it can act as a 'contract' between them
        and development that both sides can understand.

        4. Like you said, Scrum can be an easier way to "go agile" than XP.
        If you're walking into an environment with no unit tests, no
        continuous integration and developers that break out in hives at the
        mention of pair programming, you can still implement Scrum fairly
        easily.

        My impression is that both XP and Scrum have crude 'stubs' of each
        other built into them, which suggests that they were meant to be used
        together - which begs the question, "Is Scrum going to end up just
        being part of XP?"

        --- In scrumdevelopment@y..., Lowell Lindstrom <lindstrom@o...> wrote:
        > I can't seem to find a substantial difference between the XP
        Planning Game
        > and Scrum. There are subtle differences, but if the team is
        adapting their
        > work as they proceed, I can't see why I starting with one versus
        the other
        > would have make any difference in the outcome of the project.
        >
        > I can see how Scrum would be a way to move towards XP in a "non-XP-
        friendly"
        > environment or simply a way to be Agile, if I not using XP
        programming
        > practices.
        >
        > If I am in an "XP-friendly" environment, I would not want to
        complicate
        > things by introducing Scrum terminology for project management,
        which is
        > largely redundant to the Planning Game.
        >
        >
        >
        > > -----Original Message-----
        > > From: kschwaber [mailto:ken.schwaber@v...]
        > > Sent: Monday, May 13, 2002 2:00 PM
        > > To: extremeprogramming@y...
        > > Subject: [XP] Scrum and XP
        > >
        > >
        > > On May 12, Ron Jefferies wrote:
        > >
        > > >> What does Scrum seem to have that XP does not? It seems to me
        that
        > > >> Scrum is a subset of XP.
        > >
        > > I used to think that XP was a subset of Scrum until I understood
        XP
        > > better. Then I understood that Scrum is a set of business and
        project
        > > management practices, XP is a set of engineering practices. They
        both
        > > use iterations, increments, emergence, self-organization, and
        > > collaboration, so I've been able to use each of them to make up
        for
        > > what the other doesn't address.
        > >
        > > Ken Schwaber
        > >
      • Mike Beedle
        ... Lowell: Your assessment is correct. However, there is a glitch: the planning game is like Scrum, but Scrum has a larger scope than the planning game. Let
        Message 3 of 20 , May 15, 2002
        • 0 Attachment
          Lowell Lindstrom wrote:
          > I can't seem to find a substantial difference between
          > the XP Planning Game and Scrum. There are subtle
          > differences, but if the team is adapting their
          > work as they proceed, I can't see why I starting
          > with one versus the other would have make any
          > difference in the outcome of the project.

          Lowell:

          Your assessment is correct. However, there is a glitch:
          the planning game is like Scrum, but Scrum has a larger
          scope than the planning game. Let me explain.

          Kent Beck, which invented the "planning game", by his own
          account got a lot of inspiration from Scrum. (Kent if you
          are lurking can you please comment?) So, yes, there is
          a great deal of overlap. And a lot of credit should go
          to Kent for "borrowing" things from Scrum. After all,
          he had the hard job to find and choose the
          "simplest thing that worked for management". And he did,
          he found and chose Scrum, after looking at hundreds if
          not thousands of "management frameworks" over the years.

          However, the Product Backlog in Scrum includes much more
          than the functional user stories. And it is for this
          reason that XP (with the planning game) is different than
          practicing Scrum + XP -- because Scrum includes _all_
          activities, not only the functional software stories.

          So for example, business analysis, business design,
          training, integration, CM, System Test, product upgrades,
          business changes, and _any_ other activities are all part
          of the Scrum Product Backlog, but they wouldn't be part of
          the XP stories.

          For example, Martine Devos and I have used it for in
          the past for BPR (business process reengineering),
          and Jeff and Ken have used it for a myriad of other
          activities related and unrelated to software development.

          In fact, when Ken and I wrote "Agile Software Development
          with Scrum" we made the conscious decision to not mix
          any other software development practices in explaining
          Scrum, because we didn't want people to confuse Scrum
          with being "just another software development method".

          Instead, we wanted to make the statement that Scrum is
          "agile management" and it works for any activity,
          not only software development. In contrast XP minus
          the planning game, is a collection of practices or
          patterns for "agile software engineering".

          You should also know that in our meeting last year at
          Snowbird UT, which got the agilealliance.org started, Kent
          was the most vocal advocate in having a Scrum book written,
          because as he stated, and I am paraphrasing: there weren't
          any reference materials he could quote (with ISBN numbers).

          The only thing available at the time were a few websites:
          http://www.controlchaos.com
          http://www.jeffsutherland.com
          etc.

          and he felt that websites unfortunately are fairly volatile.

          Now of course there is that book, "Agile Software Development
          with Scrum", written by a couple of software rebels
          (with a cause).

          Lowell Lindstrom wrote:
          > I can see how Scrum would be a way to move
          > towards XP in a "non-XP-friendly" environment or
          > simply a way to be Agile, if I not using XP programming
          > practices.
          > If I am in an "XP-friendly" environment, I would
          > not want to complicate things by introducing Scrum
          > terminology for project management, which is
          > largely redundant to the Planning Game.

          But just remember there _is_ a difference between XP's
          planning game and Scrum. When the sources of change
          are contained within the functional user stories you
          should be ok with XP.

          However, when all sort of things start to change, it is probably
          best to move to Scrum because Scrum provides and agile
          management framework to manage _all_ of the activities
          of many related projects at all levels of the organization.

          How can this be beneficial? Well, there are weird
          examples of Scrum being applied in cases where the
          development tools change in the middle of development
          (databases, IDEs, programming languages, etc.), or
          when _radical_ business changes change the architecture
          of a large system, or when there are issues about coordinating
          the activities of multiple teams: Application teams,
          Testing, CM/Integration, Systems Support, etc.

          In all cases, Scrum continues to deliver through the
          realization of Product Backlog items.

          This difference is in fact the source of inspiration
          for what we practice at Hipaa Accelerator and e-Architects:
          XBreed, which is Scrum for management, XP for engineering,
          Alexanderian ideas, and a few new original ideas mixed
          throughout.

          More on XBreed at: http://www.xbreed.net

          Btw, the name XBreed, means "cross breed" and it represents
          the genetic combination of Scrum and XP (the combination of patterns).
          And as nature would have it, it represents the survival of
          the strongest genes from cross-breeding three already very
          strong animals:

          Scrum, XP, and Alexanderian Patterns theory/philosophy.

          - Mike

          http://www.hipaaccelerator.com
          We are hiring Java Developers, architects and project managers.
          http://www.e-architects.com

          http://www.xbreed.net
          http://www.agilescrum.com
          http://www.livingmetaphor.org

          http://www.agilealliance.org
        • Ken Schwaber
          Scrum is for any development project (we even used it for marketing programs), including software development. XP is for software engineering. Scrum and XP
          Message 4 of 20 , May 15, 2002
          • 0 Attachment
            Scrum is for any development project (we even used it for marketing
            programs), including software development. XP is for software engineering.
            Scrum and XP work together great on software engineering projects, where
            neither work that well by themselves. Scrum is going to reengineer IT in
            organizations, from over the wall projects owned by IT, to projects owned by
            users that are staffed by responsible XP trained IT teams. XP is a subset of
            Scrum. XP@Scrum.
            Ken

            -----Original Message-----
            From: andycirillo [mailto:acirillo@...]
            Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 2:37 AM
            To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
            Subject: [scrumdevelopment] Re: [XP] Scrum and XP


            I won't attempt to answer your question because I'm kind of wondering
            the same thing (except that my version is 'Isn't the XP planning game
            just a scaled-down version of Scrum?')

            I would like to make a few comments in support of Scrum however:

            1. Scrum is scalable. There are precedents for having Scrums of
            Scrums of Scrums, which is critical if you want to use agile methods
            across an organization, or on very large teams.

            2. I think the Scrum concept of a backlog is more sophisticated than
            anything on the XP side. The flow from Product Backlog to Version
            Backlog to Sprint Backlog gives you a nice clean way to manage a
            product roadmap without sacrificing flexibility.

            3. Scrum is something that professional managers can relate to.
            These guys don't care about continuous integration or unit testing.
            XP is largely outside of their world, which means that they will have
            a hard time relating to development. Scrum is something they can
            sink their teeth into, and it can act as a 'contract' between them
            and development that both sides can understand.

            4. Like you said, Scrum can be an easier way to "go agile" than XP.
            If you're walking into an environment with no unit tests, no
            continuous integration and developers that break out in hives at the
            mention of pair programming, you can still implement Scrum fairly
            easily.

            My impression is that both XP and Scrum have crude 'stubs' of each
            other built into them, which suggests that they were meant to be used
            together - which begs the question, "Is Scrum going to end up just
            being part of XP?"

            --- In scrumdevelopment@y..., Lowell Lindstrom <lindstrom@o...> wrote:
            > I can't seem to find a substantial difference between the XP
            Planning Game
            > and Scrum. There are subtle differences, but if the team is
            adapting their
            > work as they proceed, I can't see why I starting with one versus
            the other
            > would have make any difference in the outcome of the project.
            >
            > I can see how Scrum would be a way to move towards XP in a "non-XP-
            friendly"
            > environment or simply a way to be Agile, if I not using XP
            programming
            > practices.
            >
            > If I am in an "XP-friendly" environment, I would not want to
            complicate
            > things by introducing Scrum terminology for project management,
            which is
            > largely redundant to the Planning Game.
            >
            >
            >
            > > -----Original Message-----
            > > From: kschwaber [mailto:ken.schwaber@v...]
            > > Sent: Monday, May 13, 2002 2:00 PM
            > > To: extremeprogramming@y...
            > > Subject: [XP] Scrum and XP
            > >
            > >
            > > On May 12, Ron Jefferies wrote:
            > >
            > > >> What does Scrum seem to have that XP does not? It seems to me
            that
            > > >> Scrum is a subset of XP.
            > >
            > > I used to think that XP was a subset of Scrum until I understood
            XP
            > > better. Then I understood that Scrum is a set of business and
            project
            > > management practices, XP is a set of engineering practices. They
            both
            > > use iterations, increments, emergence, self-organization, and
            > > collaboration, so I've been able to use each of them to make up
            for
            > > what the other doesn't address.
            > >
            > > Ken Schwaber
            > >



            To Post a message, send it to: scrumdevelopment@...
            To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
            scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...

            Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
          • Mike Beedle
            Andy: Great response. You make a couple of very good points about the separation of concerns (management/engineering) and about the scope of each. However,
            Message 5 of 20 , May 15, 2002
            • 0 Attachment
               
              Andy:
               
              Great response.  You make a couple of very good points about the separation of
              concerns (management/engineering) and about the scope of each.
               
              However, let me focus on your question:  "Is Scrum going to end up just being part of XP?"
               
              Here is my take:  not a chance.  If anything, XP might eventually adopt a "full Scrum"
              approach, and eventually get closer to a full gene mix of XP and Scrum.  But many of
              us have already passed that level even 2 years ago.
               
              However, XP@Scrum and XBreed have gone beyond that level by seeking very specific goals
              that will contribute with more agile practices/patterns.
               
              In the case of XP@Scrum the new extra practices will come from the emphasis on
              "Business-Value Driven Development".  I am anxious to get a copy of Ken and Kane's
              new book on  Business-Value Driven Development.  Ken, do you guys have concrete
              date for when we might expect this book?  
               
              In the case of XBreed, the new practices will come from the goal of creating a
              layered framework of reusable components shared among many contributing teams.
               
              - Mike 
               
              -----Original Message-----
              From: andycirillo [mailto:acirillo@...]
              Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 1:37 AM
              To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: [scrumdevelopment] Re: [XP] Scrum and XP

              I won't attempt to answer your question because I'm kind of wondering
              the same thing (except that my version is 'Isn't the XP planning game
              just a scaled-down version of Scrum?')

              I would like to make a few comments in support of Scrum however:

              1.  Scrum is scalable.  There are precedents for having Scrums of
              Scrums of Scrums, which is critical if you want to use agile methods
              across an organization, or on very large teams.

              2.  I think the Scrum concept of a backlog is more sophisticated than
              anything on the XP side.  The flow from Product Backlog to Version
              Backlog to Sprint Backlog gives you a nice clean way to manage a
              product roadmap without sacrificing flexibility.

              3.  Scrum is something that professional managers can relate to. 
              These guys don't care about continuous integration or unit testing. 
              XP is largely outside of their world, which means that they will have
              a hard time relating to development.  Scrum is something they can
              sink their teeth into, and it can act as a 'contract' between them
              and development that both sides can understand.

              4.  Like you said, Scrum can be an easier way to "go agile" than XP. 
              If you're walking into an environment with no unit tests, no
              continuous integration and developers that break out in hives at the
              mention of pair programming, you can still implement Scrum fairly
              easily.

              My impression is that both XP and Scrum have crude 'stubs' of each
              other built into them, which suggests that they were meant to be used
              together - which begs the question, "Is Scrum going to end up just
              being part of XP?"

              --- In scrumdevelopment@y..., Lowell Lindstrom <lindstrom@o...> wrote:
              > I can't seem to find a substantial difference between the XP
              Planning Game
              > and Scrum.  There are subtle differences, but if the team is
              adapting their
              > work as they proceed, I can't see why I starting with one versus
              the other
              > would have make any difference in the outcome of the project.
              >
              > I can see how Scrum would be a way to move towards XP in a "non-XP-
              friendly"
              > environment or simply a way to be Agile, if I not using XP
              programming
              > practices.
              >
              > If I am in an "XP-friendly" environment, I would not want to
              complicate
              > things by introducing Scrum terminology for project management,
              which is
              > largely redundant to the Planning Game.
              >
              >
              >
              > > -----Original Message-----
              > > From: kschwaber [mailto:ken.schwaber@v...]
              > > Sent: Monday, May 13, 2002 2:00 PM
              > > To: extremeprogramming@y...
              > > Subject: [XP] Scrum and XP
              > >
              > >
              > > On May 12, Ron Jefferies wrote:
              > >
              > > >> What does Scrum seem to have that XP does not? It seems to me
              that
              > > >> Scrum is a subset of XP.
              > >
              > > I used to think that XP was a subset of Scrum until I understood
              XP
              > > better. Then I understood that Scrum is a set of business and
              project
              > > management practices, XP is a set of engineering practices. They
              both
              > > use iterations, increments, emergence, self-organization, and
              > > collaboration, so I've been able to use each of them to make up
              for
              > > what the other doesn't address.
              > >
              > > Ken Schwaber
              > >



              To Post a message, send it to:   scrumdevelopment@...
              To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...


              Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
            • Ken Schwaber
              And what a great combination xp@Scrum and XBreed will be!!! No date yet for my book. Ken ... From: Mike Beedle [mailto:beedlem@e-architects.com] Sent:
              Message 6 of 20 , May 15, 2002
              • 0 Attachment
                And what a great combination xp@Scrum and XBreed will be!!! No date yet for my book.
                Ken
                -----Original Message-----
                From: Mike Beedle [mailto:beedlem@...]
                Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 8:57 AM
                To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: RE: [scrumdevelopment] Re: [XP] Scrum and XP

                 
                Andy:
                 
                Great response.  You make a couple of very good points about the separation of
                concerns (management/engineering) and about the scope of each.
                 
                However, let me focus on your question:  "Is Scrum going to end up just being part of XP?"
                 
                Here is my take:  not a chance.  If anything, XP might eventually adopt a "full Scrum"
                approach, and eventually get closer to a full gene mix of XP and Scrum.  But many of
                us have already passed that level even 2 years ago.
                 
                However, XP@Scrum and XBreed have gone beyond that level by seeking very specific goals
                that will contribute with more agile practices/patterns.
                 
                In the case of XP@Scrum the new extra practices will come from the emphasis on
                "Business-Value Driven Development".  I am anxious to get a copy of Ken and Kane's
                new book on  Business-Value Driven Development.  Ken, do you guys have concrete
                date for when we might expect this book?  
                 
                In the case of XBreed, the new practices will come from the goal of creating a
                layered framework of reusable components shared among many contributing teams.
                 
                - Mike 
                 
                -----Original Message-----
                From: andycirillo [mailto:acirillo@...]
                Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 1:37 AM
                To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: [scrumdevelopment] Re: [XP] Scrum and XP

                I won't attempt to answer your question because I'm kind of wondering
                the same thing (except that my version is 'Isn't the XP planning game
                just a scaled-down version of Scrum?')

                I would like to make a few comments in support of Scrum however:

                1.  Scrum is scalable.  There are precedents for having Scrums of
                Scrums of Scrums, which is critical if you want to use agile methods
                across an organization, or on very large teams.

                2.  I think the Scrum concept of a backlog is more sophisticated than
                anything on the XP side.  The flow from Product Backlog to Version
                Backlog to Sprint Backlog gives you a nice clean way to manage a
                product roadmap without sacrificing flexibility.

                3.  Scrum is something that professional managers can relate to. 
                These guys don't care about continuous integration or unit testing. 
                XP is largely outside of their world, which means that they will have
                a hard time relating to development.  Scrum is something they can
                sink their teeth into, and it can act as a 'contract' between them
                and development that both sides can understand.

                4.  Like you said, Scrum can be an easier way to "go agile" than XP. 
                If you're walking into an environment with no unit tests, no
                continuous integration and developers that break out in hives at the
                mention of pair programming, you can still implement Scrum fairly
                easily.

                My impression is that both XP and Scrum have crude 'stubs' of each
                other built into them, which suggests that they were meant to be used
                together - which begs the question, "Is Scrum going to end up just
                being part of XP?"

                --- In scrumdevelopment@y..., Lowell Lindstrom <lindstrom@o...> wrote:
                > I can't seem to find a substantial difference between the XP
                Planning Game
                > and Scrum.  There are subtle differences, but if the team is
                adapting their
                > work as they proceed, I can't see why I starting with one versus
                the other
                > would have make any difference in the outcome of the project.
                >
                > I can see how Scrum would be a way to move towards XP in a "non-XP-
                friendly"
                > environment or simply a way to be Agile, if I not using XP
                programming
                > practices.
                >
                > If I am in an "XP-friendly" environment, I would not want to
                complicate
                > things by introducing Scrum terminology for project management,
                which is
                > largely redundant to the Planning Game.
                >
                >
                >
                > > -----Original Message-----
                > > From: kschwaber [mailto:ken.schwaber@v...]
                > > Sent: Monday, May 13, 2002 2:00 PM
                > > To: extremeprogramming@y...
                > > Subject: [XP] Scrum and XP
                > >
                > >
                > > On May 12, Ron Jefferies wrote:
                > >
                > > >> What does Scrum seem to have that XP does not? It seems to me
                that
                > > >> Scrum is a subset of XP.
                > >
                > > I used to think that XP was a subset of Scrum until I understood
                XP
                > > better. Then I understood that Scrum is a set of business and
                project
                > > management practices, XP is a set of engineering practices. They
                both
                > > use iterations, increments, emergence, self-organization, and
                > > collaboration, so I've been able to use each of them to make up
                for
                > > what the other doesn't address.
                > >
                > > Ken Schwaber
                > >



                To Post a message, send it to:   scrumdevelopment@...
                To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...


                Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


                To Post a message, send it to:   scrumdevelopment@...
                To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...


                Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
              • Lowell Lindstrom
                ... I appreciate the background. I think it gives some explanation as to why we have two sets of practices that are so similar, yet have different names. For
                Message 7 of 20 , May 15, 2002
                • 0 Attachment
                  > -----Original Message-----
                  > From: Mike Beedle [mailto:beedlem@...]
                  > Lowell Lindstrom wrote:
                  > > I can't seem to find a substantial difference between
                  > > the XP Planning Game and Scrum. There are subtle
                  > > differences, but if the team is adapting their
                  > > work as they proceed, I can't see why I starting
                  > > with one versus the other would have make any
                  > > difference in the outcome of the project.
                  >
                  > Lowell:
                  >
                  > Your assessment is correct. However, there is a glitch:
                  > the planning game is like Scrum, but Scrum has a larger
                  > scope than the planning game. Let me explain.
                  >
                  > [background clipped.....]

                  I appreciate the background. I think it gives some explanation as to why we
                  have two sets of practices that are so similar, yet have different names.
                  For the practitioner, I don't believe that the historical relationship
                  between XP and Scrum are important. My main point was that if you are
                  evolving your practices, XP Planning (or Scrum) will evolve to include the
                  parts of the Scrum (or XP) that it needs. I don't need to confuse the
                  process by introducing Scrum terminology (XP Planning terminology). From
                  the first XP Immersion course, when the questioned was raised about
                  documentation and other "stories" that don't end up as software tasks, the
                  answer has been "if you need them, you can make them stories and plan them
                  with the planning game." Adapt as you need based on feedback from the
                  process.

                  They will evolve to the same result in practice without the shift in
                  terminology. The XP@Scrum thing seems forced to me, unless I am in an
                  existing Scrum shop. If I am with a team that is new to both, I am
                  introducing un-needed complexity with redundant practices. XP Planning is
                  sufficient in this case.

                  I am not advocating XP over Scrum or vice versa. It is the combination
                  that, to me, that has unneeded complexity for the new team.

                  >
                  > However, when all sort of things start to change, it is probably
                  > best to move to Scrum because Scrum provides and agile
                  > management framework to manage _all_ of the activities
                  > of many related projects at all levels of the organization.
                  >

                  I am unclear why I need to rename everything when the practices are
                  basically the same. Why is it not sufficient to simply keep the XP Planning
                  terminology, in this case, and use the practices on non-functional stories?
                  This seems much more simple to me. I just don't see much benefit to balance
                  against the cost of re-learning. This becomes particularly important in
                  larger organizations.

                  >
                  > This difference is in fact the source of inspiration
                  > for what we practice at Hipaa Accelerator and e-Architects:
                  > XBreed, which is Scrum for management, XP for engineering,
                  > Alexanderian ideas, and a few new original ideas mixed
                  > throughout.
                  >

                  Did you consider expressing XBreed as simply additional practices to Scrum,
                  XP, and Patterns? Having yet another agile method that primarily overlaps
                  with others seems like forced complexity. If we were talking about code,
                  wouldn't we refactor these to avoid the duplication? It feels like we are
                  going to brand a new methodolgy with every project rather than grow and
                  adapt the toolkit of agile practices as we learn more and apply these ideas
                  to new domains and technologies.
                • Ken Schwaber
                  Lowell, The reason why we go through the extra effort to rationalize the overlapping names between Scrum and XP is that Scrum terminology is more understood,
                  Message 8 of 20 , May 15, 2002
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Lowell,
                    The reason why we go through the extra effort to rationalize the overlapping
                    names between Scrum and XP is that Scrum terminology is more understood,
                    more business natural. It fits with business project and product managers.
                    XP is more OO and engineering-centric and feels alien to this audience. It's
                    our way to get agile used with XP engineering practices. It eases the
                    implementation of XP and allows us to scale XP elsewhere in the
                    organization.
                    Ken

                    -----Original Message-----
                    From: Lowell Lindstrom [mailto:lindstrom@...]
                    Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 10:53 AM
                    To: 'extremeprogramming@yahoogroups.com';
                    scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
                    Subject: [scrumdevelopment] RE: [XP] Scrum and XP


                    > -----Original Message-----
                    > From: Mike Beedle [mailto:beedlem@...]
                    > Lowell Lindstrom wrote:
                    > > I can't seem to find a substantial difference between
                    > > the XP Planning Game and Scrum. There are subtle
                    > > differences, but if the team is adapting their
                    > > work as they proceed, I can't see why I starting
                    > > with one versus the other would have make any
                    > > difference in the outcome of the project.
                    >
                    > Lowell:
                    >
                    > Your assessment is correct. However, there is a glitch:
                    > the planning game is like Scrum, but Scrum has a larger
                    > scope than the planning game. Let me explain.
                    >
                    > [background clipped.....]

                    I appreciate the background. I think it gives some explanation as to why we
                    have two sets of practices that are so similar, yet have different names.
                    For the practitioner, I don't believe that the historical relationship
                    between XP and Scrum are important. My main point was that if you are
                    evolving your practices, XP Planning (or Scrum) will evolve to include the
                    parts of the Scrum (or XP) that it needs. I don't need to confuse the
                    process by introducing Scrum terminology (XP Planning terminology). From
                    the first XP Immersion course, when the questioned was raised about
                    documentation and other "stories" that don't end up as software tasks, the
                    answer has been "if you need them, you can make them stories and plan them
                    with the planning game." Adapt as you need based on feedback from the
                    process.

                    They will evolve to the same result in practice without the shift in
                    terminology. The XP@Scrum thing seems forced to me, unless I am in an
                    existing Scrum shop. If I am with a team that is new to both, I am
                    introducing un-needed complexity with redundant practices. XP Planning is
                    sufficient in this case.

                    I am not advocating XP over Scrum or vice versa. It is the combination
                    that, to me, that has unneeded complexity for the new team.

                    >
                    > However, when all sort of things start to change, it is probably
                    > best to move to Scrum because Scrum provides and agile
                    > management framework to manage _all_ of the activities
                    > of many related projects at all levels of the organization.
                    >

                    I am unclear why I need to rename everything when the practices are
                    basically the same. Why is it not sufficient to simply keep the XP Planning
                    terminology, in this case, and use the practices on non-functional stories?
                    This seems much more simple to me. I just don't see much benefit to balance
                    against the cost of re-learning. This becomes particularly important in
                    larger organizations.

                    >
                    > This difference is in fact the source of inspiration
                    > for what we practice at Hipaa Accelerator and e-Architects:
                    > XBreed, which is Scrum for management, XP for engineering,
                    > Alexanderian ideas, and a few new original ideas mixed
                    > throughout.
                    >

                    Did you consider expressing XBreed as simply additional practices to Scrum,
                    XP, and Patterns? Having yet another agile method that primarily overlaps
                    with others seems like forced complexity. If we were talking about code,
                    wouldn't we refactor these to avoid the duplication? It feels like we are
                    going to brand a new methodolgy with every project rather than grow and
                    adapt the toolkit of agile practices as we learn more and apply these ideas
                    to new domains and technologies.



                    To Post a message, send it to: scrumdevelopment@...
                    To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
                    scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...

                    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                  • Linda Rising
                    We had some real Scrum enthusiasts who said: If you can t Scrum it, don t do it :-)!
                    Message 9 of 20 , May 15, 2002
                    • 0 Attachment
                      We had some real Scrum enthusiasts who said: If you can't Scrum it, don't do it :-)!



                      Ken Schwaber wrote:
                      Scrum is for any development project (we even used it for marketing
                      programs), including software development. XP is for software engineering.
                      Scrum and XP work together great on software engineering projects, where
                      neither work that well by themselves. Scrum is going to reengineer IT in
                      organizations, from over the wall projects owned by IT, to projects owned by
                      users that are staffed by responsible XP trained IT teams. XP is a subset of
                      Scrum. XP@Scrum.
                      Ken

                      -----Original Message-----
                      From: andycirillo [mailto:acirillo@...]
                      Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 2:37 AM
                      To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
                      Subject: [scrumdevelopment] Re: [XP] Scrum and XP


                      I won't attempt to answer your question because I'm kind of wondering
                      the same thing (except that my version is 'Isn't the XP planning game
                      just a scaled-down version of Scrum?')

                      I would like to make a few comments in support of Scrum however:

                      1. Scrum is scalable. There are precedents for having Scrums of
                      Scrums of Scrums, which is critical if you want to use agile methods
                      across an organization, or on very large teams.

                      2. I think the Scrum concept of a backlog is more sophisticated than
                      anything on the XP side. The flow from Product Backlog to Version
                      Backlog to Sprint Backlog gives you a nice clean way to manage a
                      product roadmap without sacrificing flexibility.

                      3. Scrum is something that professional managers can relate to.
                      These guys don't care about continuous integration or unit testing.
                      XP is largely outside of their world, which means that they will have
                      a hard time relating to development. Scrum is something they can
                      sink their teeth into, and it can act as a 'contract' between them
                      and developm ent that both sides can understand.

                      4. Like you said, Scrum can be an easier way to "go agile" than XP.
                      If you're walking into an environment with no unit tests, no
                      continuous integration and developers that break out in hives at the
                      mention of pair programming, you can still implement Scrum fairly
                      easily.

                      My impression is that both XP and Scrum have crude 'stubs' of each
                      other built into them, which suggests that they were meant to be used
                      together - which begs the question, "Is Scrum going to end up just
                      being part of XP?"

                      --- In scrumdevelopment@y..., Lowell Lindstrom <lindstrom@o...> wrote:
                      I can't seem to find a substantial difference between the XP
                      Planning Game
                      and Scrum.  There are subtle differences, but if the team is
                      adapting their
                      work as they proceed, I can't see why I starting with one versus
                      the other
                      would have make any difference in the outcome of the project.

                      I can see how Scrum would be a way to move towards XP in a "non-XP-
                      friendly"
                      environment or simply a way to be Agile, if I not using XP
                      programming
                      practices.

                      If I am in an "XP-friendly" environment, I would not want to
                      complicate
                      things by introducing Scrum terminology for project management,
                      which is
                      largely redundant to the Planning Game.



                      -----Original Message-----
                      From: kschwaber [mailto:ken.schwaber@v...]
                      Sent: Monday, May 13, 2002 2:00 PM
                      To: extremeprogramming@y...
                      Subject: [XP] Scrum and XP


                      On May 12, Ron Jefferies wrote:

                      What does Scrum seem to have that XP does not? It seems to me
                      that
                      Scrum is a subset of XP.
                      I used to think that XP was a subset of Scrum until I understood
                      XP
                      better. Then I understood that Scrum is a set of business and
                      project
                      management practices, XP is a set of engineering practices. They
                      both
                      use iterations, increments, emergence, self-organization, and
                      collaboration, so I've been able to use each of them to make up
                      for
                      what the other doesn't address.

                      Ken Schwaber




                      To Post a message, send it to: scrumdevelopment@...
                      To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
                      scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...

                      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




                      ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
                      Buy Stock for $4
                      and no minimums.
                      FREE Money 2002.
                      http://us.click.yahoo.com/orkH0C/n97DAA/Ey.GAA/9EfwlB/TM
                      ---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

                      To Post a message, s end it to: scrumdevelopment@...
                      To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...

                      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




                    • Linda Rising
                      Maybe that explains why I was never able to sell XP to our company but Scrum took off like a rocket! Linda
                      Message 10 of 20 , May 15, 2002
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Maybe that explains why I was never able to sell XP to our company but Scrum took off
                        like a rocket!




                        Linda



                        Ken Schwaber wrote:
                        Lowell,
                        The reason why we go through the extra effort to rationalize the overlapping
                        names between Scrum and XP is that Scrum terminology is more understood,
                        more business natural. It fits with business project and product managers.
                        XP is more OO and engineering-centric and feels alien to this audience. It's
                        our way to get agile used with XP engineering practices. It eases the
                        implementation of XP and allows us to scale XP elsewhere in the
                        organization.
                        Ken

                        -----Original Message-----
                        From: Lowell Lindstrom [mailto:lindstrom@...]
                        Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 10:53 AM
                        To: 'extremeprogramming@yahoogroups.com';
                        scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
                        Subject: [sc rumdevelopment] RE: [XP] Scrum and XP


                        -----Original Message-----
                        From: Mike Beedle [mailto:beedlem@...]
                        Lowell Lindstrom wrote:
                        I can't seem to find a substantial difference between
                        the XP Planning Game and Scrum. There are subtle
                        differences, but if the team is adapting their
                        work as they proceed, I can't see why I starting
                        with one versus the other would have make any
                        difference in the outcome of the project.
                        Lowell:

                        Your assessment is correct. However, there is a glitch:
                        the planning game is like Scrum, but Scrum has a larger
                        scope than the planning game. Let me explain.

                        [background clipped.....]

                        I appreciate the background. I think it gives some explanation as to why we
                        have two sets of practices that are so similar, yet have different names.
                        For the practitioner, I don't believe that the historical relationship
                        between XP and Scrum are important. My main point was that if you are
                        evolving your practices, XP Planning (or Scrum) will evolve to include the
                        parts of the Scrum (or XP) that it needs. I don't need to confuse the
                        process by introducing Scrum terminology (XP Planning terminology). From
                        the first XP Immersion course, when the questioned was raised about
                        documentation and other "stories" that don't end up as software tasks, the
                        answer has been "if you need them, you can make them stories and plan them
                        with the planning game." Adapt as you need based on feedback from the
                        process.

                        They will evolve to the same result in practice without the shift in
                        terminology. The XP@Scrum thing see ms forced to me, unless I am in an
                        existing Scrum shop. If I am with a team that is new to both, I am
                        introducing un-needed complexity with redundant practices. XP Planning is
                        sufficient in this case.

                        I am not advocating XP over Scrum or vice versa. It is the combination
                        that, to me, that has unneeded complexity for the new team.

                        However, when all sort of things start to change, it is probably
                        best to move to Scrum because Scrum provides and agile
                        management framework to manage _all_ of the activities
                        of many related projects at all levels of the organization.


                        I am unclear why I need to rename everything when the practices are
                        basically the same. Why is it not sufficient to simply keep the XP Planning
                        terminology, in this case, and use the practices on non-functional stories?
                        This seems much more simple to me. I just don't see much benefit to balance
                        against the cost of re-learning. This becomes particularly important in
                        larger organizations.

                        This difference is in fact the source of inspiration
                        for what we practice at Hipaa Accelerator and e-Architects:
                        XBreed, which is Scrum for management, XP for engineering,
                        Alexanderian ideas, and a few new original ideas mixed
                        throughout.


                        Did you consider expressing XBreed as simply additional practices to Scrum,
                        XP, and Patterns? Having yet another agile method that primarily overlaps
                        with others seems like forced complexity. If we were talking about code,
                        wouldn't we refactor these to avoid the duplication? It feels like we are
                        going to brand a new methodolgy with every project rather than grow and
                        adapt the toolkit of agile practices as we learn more and apply these ideas
                        to new domains and technologies.



                        To Post a message, send it to: scrumdevelopment@...
                        To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
                        scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...

                        Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



                        ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
                        Buy Stock for $4
                        and no minimums.
                        FREE Money 2002.
                        http://us.click.yahoo.com/orkH0C/n97DAA/Ey.GAA/9EfwlB/TM
                        ---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

                        To Post a message, send it to: scrumdevelopment@...
                        To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...

                        Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




                      • Lowell Lindstrom
                        Linda and Ken - Can you provide some more detail here? I have had no more trouble getting business people engaged in XP than technical. In fact, often the
                        Message 11 of 20 , May 15, 2002
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Linda and Ken -

                          Can you provide some more detail here? I have had no more trouble getting
                          business people engaged in XP than technical. In fact, often the technical
                          folks are more difficult given the emotion around pairing.

                          Linda, was it the business people that were the obstacle until you switched
                          from XP to Scrum or the developers? What did people like about Scrum? Did
                          the rocket of Scrum adoption lead to greater acceptance of the XP practices?

                          Ken, I would guess that you always lead with Scrum? Have you ever tried to
                          introduce XP only. I wouldn't expect so and I don't mean that as a
                          challenge. I am just interested in what you have experienced.

                          As I stated before, my point here is not to advocate XP over Scrum or vice
                          versa. I know one much better than the other, so that is my comfort zone,
                          that is where I can improvise with the greatest ease. I am mainly trying to
                          learn more about Scrum. I read the book to learn how Scrum could supplement
                          XP Planning for organizations that are scaling XP and dealing with multiple
                          team planning issues. It is still not clear to me why I would bring in
                          Scrum rather than simply take the couple of different practices and evolve
                          XP in that direction. I see teams doing this anyway who haven't even heard
                          of Scrum.

                          Thanks for the dialog!

                          Lowell

                          =============
                          Lowell Lindstrom
                          Object Mentor, Inc.
                          Agile Universe / XP Universe August 4-7, 2002
                          http://www.agileuniverse.com
                          Beck, Boehm, Humphreys, Cockburn, Jeffries, Fowler talkin' Agile and XP!!!



                          > From: Linda Rising <risingl@...>
                          >
                          > Maybe that explains why I was never able to sell XP to our company but
                          > Scrum took off like a rocket!
                          >
                          > Ken Schwaber wrote:
                          >
                          > >Lowell,
                          > >The reason why we go through the extra effort to rationalize
                          > the overlapping names between Scrum and XP is that Scrum terminology is
                          more
                          > understood, more business natural. It fits with business project and
                          > product managers. XP is more OO and engineering-centric and feels alien
                          to
                          > this audience. It's our way to get agile used with XP engineering
                          practices. It eases the
                          > >implementation of XP and allows us to scale XP elsewhere in the
                          organization.
                          > >Ken
                          > >
                        • Lowell Lindstrom
                          ... I agree with Mike. I don t see this happening, nor do I think anyone needs it to happen. ... Mike, here I do not understand. Your response comes across
                          Message 12 of 20 , May 15, 2002
                          • 0 Attachment
                            > From: "Mike Beedle" <beedlem@...>
                            > Subject: RE: Re: [XP] Scrum and XP
                            >
                            > However, let me focus on your question: "Is Scrum going to
                            > end up just being part of XP?"
                            >
                            > Here is my take: not a chance.

                            I agree with Mike. I don't see this happening, nor do I think anyone needs
                            it to happen.

                            > If anything, XP might eventually adopt a "full Scrum" approach,
                            > and eventually get closer to a full gene mix of XP and Scrum.

                            Mike, here I do not understand. Your response comes across to me as if you
                            feel threatened, as if XP and Scrum are in some kinda of competition with
                            each other. Perhaps I am misreading.

                            You and Ken have had good experiences using practices from both XP and
                            Scrum. I already see XP Teams naturally evolving to practices that greatly
                            resemble parts of Scrum (Scrum or scrums, more formal management of stories,
                            etc.). They don't call it Scrum because they have never heard of Scrum. I
                            don't see why we care whether XP becomes Scrum, Scrum becomes XP, or
                            everything is communicated under the umbrella of Agile Best Practices. To
                            debate that seems to miss the point, which we all seem to agree is to find
                            better ways to deliver business value through software development.

                            Lowell

                            ====================
                            Lowell Lindstrom
                            Object Mentor, Inc | www.objectmentor.com | 1-800-338-6716
                            lindstrom@...
                          • Mike Beedle
                            ... Lowell: As long as you know what things mean for you, go for it, use the names that make sense to you and your project. In different environments I use
                            Message 13 of 20 , May 15, 2002
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Lowell Lindstrom wrote:
                              > I am unclear why I need to rename everything when
                              > the practices are basically the same. Why is it
                              > not sufficient to simply keep the XP Planning
                              > terminology, in this case, and use the practices
                              > on non-functional stories? This seems much more
                              > simple to me. I just don't see much benefit
                              > to balance against the cost of re-learning. This
                              > becomes particularly important in larger organizations.

                              Lowell:

                              As long as you know what things mean for you, go for it,
                              use the names that make sense to you and your project.

                              In different environments I use these equivalences:

                              Product Owner --> typically it is in the Customer's
                              organization (too many titles to list,
                              but an example is "Chief Privacy Officer")
                              Product Backlog Items --> Stories, Features or even UCs
                              Sprint Backlog Items --> Tasks
                              Scrum Master --> Team Leader (when you have a strong
                              technical team)
                              Scrum Master --> Team Leader/Technical Leader
                              (when the team is technically weak)

                              In environments where the Scrum Master is not technical
                              and the team is not technically strong to distribute the
                              role, a new role is needed in addition:

                              Coach --> Technical Lead, Architect, (our
                              architects _always_ code at least
                              50% of the time, and mentor other in
                              design principles, patterns, and method)

                              Lowell Lindstrom wrote:
                              > Mike Beedle wrote:
                              > > This difference is in fact the source of inspiration
                              > > for what we practice at Hipaa Accelerator and e-Architects:
                              > > XBreed, which is Scrum for management, XP for engineering,
                              > > Alexanderian ideas, and a few new original ideas mixed
                              > > throughout.
                              >
                              > Did you consider expressing XBreed as simply additional
                              > practices to Scrum, XP, and Patterns? Having yet
                              > another agile method that primarily overlaps with
                              > others seems like forced complexity.

                              We use a different names for 2 main reasons:

                              1) out of respect for what XP and Scrum are,
                              because we don't like to say that we do is
                              XP or Scrum and then have someone pointing out
                              that XP or Scrum don't do things like we do.

                              2) and because we like to remember,
                              "special combinations" that lead to a desired
                              specialized result. In the case of XP@Scrum
                              is business value, and in the case of XBreed
                              is reusability. So we abstract these special
                              combinations with a name rather than tell people:

                              * use XP
                              * use Scrum but
                              * have Scrum of Scrums that include multiple teams
                              and discuss Global Product Backlogs
                              * have Scum of Scrums among individual teams that
                              discuss Application Product Backlogs
                              * Released product in terms of code bases that
                              adhere to a layered architecture
                              * communicate releases using formatted templates
                              * Do layered testing for integration with the
                              code bases resulting from the layered architecture
                              etc., etc., etc.,

                              This description is already too long for anyone to
                              understand, so we simply say do XBreed == apply all the
                              patterns that were bagged in that collection.

                              Lowell Lindstrom wrote:
                              > If we were talking about code, wouldn't we refactor
                              > these to avoid the duplication? It feels like we are going
                              > to brand a new methodolgy with every project rather
                              > than grow and adapt the toolkit of agile practices
                              > as we learn more and apply these ideas to new
                              > domains and technologies.

                              That is certainly the spirit of agility: use whatever makes
                              sense to you -- deep down, it is just one huge latent
                              Org Pattern Language anyhow.

                              (From 1996 to 1998 I spent some time in putting together
                              a Common Pattern Language for Organizations: it included
                              Scrum, Episodes (XP), Coplien's patterns, Patterns for
                              Customer relationships, System Test, etc. This project
                              is still alive, I think, and is in the hands of Jim Coplien
                              and a few other people. Our goal was to put together the
                              grand collection of org patterns and then offer people
                              the freedom to choose valid "sequences" to traverse
                              the pattern language. Each sequence would yield basically
                              to a different way of doing things i.e. a customized
                              method.)

                              So in terms of code and patterns, what we have done with
                              xP@Scrum and XBreed is choose a special "sequence" of patterns
                              in the Alexanderian sense.

                              Having said that, I don't think there are any 2 projects that
                              are identical, so the instantiation process, by default,
                              always implies differences. And these differences come
                              from either naming the practices differently, the roles
                              differently; or by simply choosing a different set of
                              practices.

                              In terms of names consider this: Monkeys and Humans have
                              a x > 99% overlap in their chromosome and gene sequences,
                              yet, this difference yields to very different animals.
                              However, as much as we are alike I don't think there
                              is any human that likes to be called a monkey
                              (and perhaps vice versa),

                              - Mike

                              http://www.hipaaccelerator.com
                              We are hiring Java Developers, architects and project managers.
                              http://www.e-architects.com

                              http://www.xbreed.net
                              http://www.agilescrum.com
                              http://www.livingmetaphor.org

                              http://www.agilealliance.org

                              http://www.mikebeedle.com
                            • Lowell Lindstrom
                              ... I can definitely see wanting to avoid the are you doing XP(Scrum)? debate. But you are doing XP and Scrum, plus MORE. What s interesting is the more
                              Message 14 of 20 , May 15, 2002
                              • 0 Attachment
                                > We use a different names for 2 main reasons:
                                >
                                > 1) out of respect for what XP and Scrum are,
                                > because we don't like to say that we do is
                                > XP or Scrum and then have someone pointing out
                                > that XP or Scrum don't do things like we do.
                                >

                                I can definitely see wanting to avoid the "are you doing XP(Scrum)? debate."
                                But you are doing XP and Scrum, plus MORE. What's interesting is the "more"
                                part, that variance, not the XP and Scrum. That is where the attention
                                should be. Naming the superset distracts from that.

                                > 2) and because we like to remember,
                                > "special combinations" that lead to a desired
                                > specialized result. In the case of XP@Scrum
                                > is business value, and in the case of XBreed
                                > is reusability. So we abstract these special
                                > combinations with a name rather than tell people:
                                >

                                Thanks! I understand a little better. Somehow I missed that each had a
                                different emphasis. I was under the impression that they were both simply
                                different combinations of XP and Scrum.

                                The name proliferation seems not agile to me. It introduces unnecessary
                                complexity. Surely XBreed projects want business value and XP@Scrum
                                projects want reuse. A better approach is to emphasize only what is unique,
                                rather than the rename the whole set. What are the set of practices that
                                when added to what we know as Scrum and XP lead to higher reuse? That is a
                                set of practices that warrants a new label, not the superset. Same with
                                XP@Scrum. What are the practices that when added to what we know as Scrum
                                and XP deliver higher business value? Call that XP@Scrum (or BVD). If it
                                is just XP, with Scrum replacing the planning game, just call it "XP with
                                Scrum as the Planning Game" or "Scrum using XP Practices for the software
                                development."

                                > In terms of names consider this: Monkeys and Humans have
                                > a x > 99% overlap in their chromosome and gene sequences,
                                > yet, this difference yields to very different animals.
                                > However, as much as we are alike I don't think there
                                > is any human that likes to be called a monkey

                                Nicely phrased! Yes, I am aware that egos are involve here ;-). I just hope
                                they can be kept in check enough not to kill the movement. A proliferation
                                of differently names sets of methods that are basically identical has that
                                risk associated with it.

                                Lowell

                                ====================
                                Lowell Lindstrom
                                Object Mentor, Inc | www.objectmentor.com | 1-800-338-6716
                                lindstrom@...
                              • Linda Rising
                                Hi Lowell, I couldn t sell management on: pair programming code ownership actually these were struggles for both management & developers. You know, now that I
                                Message 15 of 20 , May 15, 2002
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  Hi Lowell,

                                  I couldn't sell management on:

                                  pair programming
                                  code ownership

                                  actually these were struggles for both management & developers.

                                  You know, now that I think about what was going on at the time. I wasn't selling XP,
                                  someone else was and maybe he was a bit too enthusiastic...memory fading here.
                                  Gotta think about this some more...

                                  I personally was selling Scrum and because of a set of lucky coincidences, I believe
                                  I had learned how to sell new ideas. In fact, I'm writing a book of patterns about what
                                  I did -- with my good friend, Mary Lynn Manns.

                                  I gave a lot of talks locally about both XP and Scrum -- other companies and the
                                  local ACM/IEEE/SPIN. Most seemed to be more interested in Scrum than XP
                                  but, of course, I didn't work at all the places represented and usually never followed
                                  up. The ones I did know about really never used either.

                                  When I moved to Denmark for a year -- same thing -- gave a lot of talks -- most
                                  people in Europe had heard of XP but no one knew anything about Scrum. Again,
                                  they were interested but I'm not sure how many actually implemented either one.

                                  I'm not feeling like I answered your question, Lowell!!!






                                  Linda











                                  Lowell Lindstrom wrote:
                                  Linda and Ken -

                                  Can you provide some more detail here? I have had no more trouble getting
                                  business people engaged in XP than technical. In fact, often the technical
                                  folks are more difficult given the emotion around pairing.

                                  Linda, was it the business people that were the obstacle until you switched
                                  from XP to Scrum or the developers? What did people like about Scrum? Did
                                  the rocket of Scrum adoption lead to greater acceptance of the XP practices?

                                  Ken, I would guess that you always lead with Scrum? Have you ever tried to
                                  introduce XP only. I wouldn't expect so and I don't mean that as a
                                  challenge. I am just interested in what you have experienced.

                                  As I stated before, my point here is not to advocate XP over Scrum or vice
                                  versa. I know one much better than the other, so that is my comfort zone,
                                  that is where I can improvise with the greatest ease. I am mainly trying to
                                  learn more about Scrum. I rea d the book to learn how Scrum could supplement
                                  XP Planning for organizations that are scaling XP and dealing with multiple
                                  team planning issues. It is still not clear to me why I would bring in
                                  Scrum rather than simply take the couple of different practices and evolve
                                  XP in that direction. I see teams doing this anyway who haven't even heard
                                  of Scrum.

                                  Thanks for the dialog!

                                  Lowell

                                  =============
                                  Lowell Lindstrom
                                  Object Mentor, Inc.
                                  Agile Universe / XP Universe August 4-7, 2002
                                  http://www.agileuniverse.com
                                  Beck, Boehm, Humphreys, Cockburn, Jeffries, Fowler talkin' Agile and XP!!!



                                     From: Linda Rising <risingl@...>

                                  Maybe that explains why I was never able to sell XP to our company but
                                  Scrum took off like a rocket!

                                  Ken Schwaber wrote:

                                  Lowell,
                                  The reason why we go through the extra effort to rationalize
                                  the overlapping names between Scrum and XP is that Scrum terminology is
                                  more 
                                  understood, more business natural. It fits with business project and 
                                  product managers. XP is more OO and engineering-centric and feels alien
                                  to 
                                  this audience. It's our way to get agile used with XP engineering
                                  practices. It eases the
                                  implementation of XP and allows us to scale XP elsewhere in the
                                  organization.
                                  Ken


                                  ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
                                  Buy Stock for $4
                                  and no minimums.
                                  FREE Money 2002.
                                  http://us.click.yahoo.com/orkH0C/n97DAA/Ey.GAA/9EfwlB/TM
                                  ---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

                                  To Post a message, send it to: scrumdevelopment@...
                                  To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...

                                  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




                                • Linda Rising
                                  A follow-on thought. At the time I thought that pair programming would provide incredible benefit if we only knew how to implement it. I still believe that and
                                  Message 16 of 20 , May 15, 2002
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    A follow-on thought. At the time I thought that pair programming would provide
                                    incredible benefit if we only knew how to implement it. I still believe that and I'm
                                    really, really happy that Laurie Williams has been doing some research to measure
                                    it. Of course, it doesn't matter what kind of wonderful research you have -- this is
                                    an emotional issue and everyone always falls back on -- well, that doesn't apply
                                    here :-)! You gotta get around those deeper issues. It's like finding out what
                                    customers *really* want -- when they may not know themselves :-)! Interesting
                                    challenge.






                                    Linda Rising wrote:
                                    Hi Lowell,

                                    I couldn't sell management on:

                                    pair programming
                                    code ownership

                                    actually these were struggles for both management & developers.

                                    You know, now that I think about what was going on at the time. I wasn't selling XP,
                                    someone else was and maybe he was a bit too enthusiastic...memory fading here.
                                    Gotta think about this some more...

                                    I personally was selling Scrum and because of a set of lucky coincidences, I believe
                                    I had learned how to sell new ideas. In fact, I'm writing a book of patterns about what
                                    I did -- with my good friend, Mary Lynn Manns.

                                    I gave a lot of talks locally about both XP and Scrum -- other companies and the
                                    local ACM/IEEE/SPIN. Most seemed to be more interested in Scrum than XP
                                    but, of course, I didn't work at all the places represented and usually never followed
                                    up. The ones I did know about really never used either.

                                    When I moved to Denmark for a year -- same thing -- gave a lot of talks -- most
                                    people in Europe had heard of XP but no one knew anything about Scrum. Again,
                                    they were interested but I'm not sure how many actually implemented either one.

                                    I'm not feeling like I answered your question, Lowell!!!






                                    Linda











                                    Lowell Lindstrom wrote:
                                    Linda and Ken -

                                    Can you provide some more detail here? I have had no more trouble getting
                                    business people engaged in XP than technical. In fact, often the technical
                                    folks are more difficult given the emotion around pairing.

                                    Linda, was it the business people that were the obstacle until you switched
                                    from XP to Scrum or the developers? What did people like about Scrum? Did
                                    the rocket of Scrum adoption lead to greater acceptance of the XP practices?

                                    Ken, I would guess that you always lead with Scrum? Have you ever tried to
                                    introduce XP only. I wouldn't expect so and I don't mean that as a
                                    challenge. I am just interested in what you have experienced.

                                    As I stated before, my point here is not to advocate XP over Scrum or vice
                                    versa. I know one much better than the other, so that is my comfort zone,
                                    that is where I can improvise with the greatest ease. I am mainly trying to
                                    learn more about Scrum. I r ea
                                    d the book to learn how Scrum could supplement
                                    XP Planning for organizations that are scaling XP and dealing with multiple
                                    team planning issues. It is still not clear to me why I would bring in
                                    Scrum rather than simply take the couple of different practices and evolve
                                    XP in that direction. I see teams doing this anyway who haven't even heard
                                    of Scrum.

                                    Thanks for the dialog!

                                    Lowell

                                    =============
                                    Lowell Lindstrom
                                    Object Mentor, Inc.
                                    Agile Universe / XP Universe August 4-7, 2002
                                    http://www.agileuniverse.com
                                    Beck, Boehm, Humphreys, Cockburn, Jeffries, Fowler talkin' Agile and XP!!!



                                       From: Linda Rising <risingl@...>

                                    Maybe that explains why I was never able to sell XP to our company but
                                    Scrum took off like a rocket!

                                    Ken Schwaber wrote:

                                    Lowell,
                                    The reason why we go through the extra effort to rationalize
                                    the overlapping names between Scrum and XP is that Scrum terminology is
                                    more 
                                    understood, more business natural. It fits with business project and 
                                    product managers. XP is more OO and engineering-centric and feels alien
                                    to 
                                    this audience. It's our way to get agile used with XP engineering
                                    practices. It eases the
                                    implementation of XP and allows us to scale XP elsewhere in the
                                    organization.
                                    Ken


                                    ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
                                    Buy Stock for $4
                                    and no minimums.
                                    FREE Money 2002.
                                    http://us.click.yahoo.com/orkH0C/n97DAA/Ey.GAA/9EfwlB/TM
                                    ---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

                                    To Post a message, send it to: scrumdevelopment@...
                                    To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...

                                    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/






                                    To Post a message, send it to:   scrumdevelopment@...
                                    To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...


                                    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service .

                                  • Mike Beedle
                                    ... Lowell: I disagree. I feel it clarifies the purpose. The problem also is that is not only +more as you point out above, but in many cases is: +more
                                    Message 17 of 20 , May 15, 2002
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      Lowell Lindstrom wrote:
                                      > > We use a different names for 2 main reasons:
                                      > >
                                      > > 1) out of respect for what XP and Scrum are,
                                      > > because we don't like to say that we do is
                                      > > XP or Scrum and then have someone pointing out
                                      > > that XP or Scrum don't do things like we do.
                                      > >
                                      >
                                      > I can definitely see wanting to avoid the "are you doing
                                      > XP(Scrum)? debate." But you are doing XP and Scrum,
                                      > plus MORE. What's interesting is the "more"
                                      > part, that variance, not the XP and Scrum. That is
                                      > where the attention should be. Naming the superset
                                      > distracts from that.

                                      Lowell:

                                      I disagree. I feel it clarifies the purpose.

                                      The problem also is that is not only +more as you point
                                      out above, but in many cases is:

                                      +more +modifying or specializing something in
                                      Scrum or XP. For example, there are highly specialized
                                      Scrum of Scrums in an XBreed environment, we don't
                                      only care about Product Backlog, but about many
                                      Backlogs with dependencies. So even when the
                                      spirit of Scrum survives, the meeting is structured
                                      around different buckets.

                                      Lowell Lindstrom wrote:
                                      > > 2) and because we like to remember,
                                      > > "special combinations" that lead to a desired
                                      > > specialized result. In the case of XP@Scrum
                                      > > is business value, and in the case of XBreed
                                      > > is reusability. So we abstract these special
                                      > > combinations with a name rather than tell people:
                                      > >
                                      >
                                      > Thanks! I understand a little better. Somehow I missed
                                      > that each had a different emphasis. I was under the
                                      > impression that they were both simply different
                                      > combinations of XP and Scrum.

                                      Unfortunately, Ken and I, and the people that we associate with
                                      are typically on the trenches, so we have had little time
                                      to explain things better.

                                      Lowell Lindstrom wrote:
                                      > The name proliferation seems not agile to me. It introduces unnecessary
                                      > complexity. Surely XBreed projects want business value and XP@Scrum
                                      > projects want reuse. A better approach is to emphasize only what
                                      > is unique, rather than the rename the whole set. What are
                                      > the set of practices that when added to what we know as
                                      > Scrum and XP lead to higher reuse? That is a set of practices that
                                      > warrants a new label, not the superset. Same with XP@Scrum. What
                                      > are the practices that when added to what we know as Scrum
                                      > and XP deliver higher business value? Call that XP@Scrum (or BVD).
                                      > If it is just XP, with Scrum replacing the planning game, just
                                      > call it "XP with Scrum as the Planning Game" or "Scrum using
                                      > XP Practices for the software development."

                                      Unfortunately, there are many modifications so it can't be
                                      expressed by something as simple as:

                                      "XP with Scrum as the Planning Game"

                                      That is a starting point, and in fact, that's more or less
                                      how XBreed started, but once the focus changed, the sentence
                                      became a paragraph, the paragraph became a chapter, and
                                      pretty soon you have something new.

                                      I suspect the same thing is going on with xp@Scrum.

                                      Lowell Lindstrom wrote:
                                      > > In terms of names consider this: Monkeys and Humans have
                                      > > a x > 99% overlap in their chromosome and gene sequences,
                                      > > yet, this difference yields to very different animals.
                                      > > However, as much as we are alike I don't think there
                                      > > is any human that likes to be called a monkey
                                      >
                                      > Nicely phrased! Yes, I am aware that egos are involve here ;-).
                                      > I just hope they can be kept in check enough not to
                                      > kill the movement. A proliferation of differently names
                                      > sets of methods that are basically identical has that
                                      > risk associated with it.

                                      Well, I didn't mean to say anything related to egos.

                                      My point was that simple changes in the meta-architecture of
                                      a system (genotype) can yield to big changes in the overall
                                      structure of the instances (phenotype), and that they
                                      may deserve a different abstraction - a different word.

                                      Actually, we did discuss "name proliferation" at our initial
                                      meeting at Snowbird, and we encouraged each other to explore
                                      and try new things without trying to "unify" things ;-)

                                      Diversity makes us stronger,

                                      - Mike


                                      http://www.hipaaccelerator.com
                                      We are hiring Java Developers, architects and project managers.
                                      http://www.e-architects.com

                                      http://www.xbreed.net
                                      http://www.agilescrum.com
                                      http://www.livingmetaphor.org

                                      http://www.agilealliance.org

                                      http://www.mikebeedle.com
                                    • Ken Schwaber
                                      Lowell, I agree with all of your sentiments. I lead with Scrum because I know it best since I m more of a product manager and project manager at this point
                                      Message 18 of 20 , May 15, 2002
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        Lowell,
                                        I agree with all of your sentiments.

                                        I lead with Scrum because I know it best since I'm more of a product manager
                                        and project manager at this point than a developer. I probably couldn't lead
                                        with XP because of the change management required for the engineering
                                        practices. This doesn't mean that XP's engineering practices aren't needed!!
                                        When the engineering practices are weak, as they are at almost IT shops
                                        doing web development, I recommend XP and have recently been brining in
                                        buildmasters or scrummasters from ThoughtWorks to implement them for the
                                        customer while the project is underway.

                                        I can bring Scrum in and within 1 day have the team developing software,
                                        "the art of the possible." If their engineering practices are weak, the
                                        productivity is lower and the bugs are many. As the engineering practices
                                        improve, so do the increments of functionality. This way XP slips in bit by
                                        bit rather than being a big "let's study it."

                                        Ken

                                        -----Original Message-----
                                        From: Lowell Lindstrom [mailto:lindstrom@...]
                                        Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 4:56 PM
                                        To: 'scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com'
                                        Subject: [scrumdevelopment] RE: Re: [XP] Scrum and XP


                                        > From: "Mike Beedle" <beedlem@...>
                                        > Subject: RE: Re: [XP] Scrum and XP
                                        >
                                        > However, let me focus on your question: "Is Scrum going to
                                        > end up just being part of XP?"
                                        >
                                        > Here is my take: not a chance.

                                        I agree with Mike. I don't see this happening, nor do I think anyone needs
                                        it to happen.

                                        > If anything, XP might eventually adopt a "full Scrum" approach,
                                        > and eventually get closer to a full gene mix of XP and Scrum.

                                        Mike, here I do not understand. Your response comes across to me as if you
                                        feel threatened, as if XP and Scrum are in some kinda of competition with
                                        each other. Perhaps I am misreading.

                                        You and Ken have had good experiences using practices from both XP and
                                        Scrum. I already see XP Teams naturally evolving to practices that greatly
                                        resemble parts of Scrum (Scrum or scrums, more formal management of stories,
                                        etc.). They don't call it Scrum because they have never heard of Scrum. I
                                        don't see why we care whether XP becomes Scrum, Scrum becomes XP, or
                                        everything is communicated under the umbrella of Agile Best Practices. To
                                        debate that seems to miss the point, which we all seem to agree is to find
                                        better ways to deliver business value through software development.

                                        Lowell

                                        ====================
                                        Lowell Lindstrom
                                        Object Mentor, Inc | www.objectmentor.com | 1-800-338-6716
                                        lindstrom@...



                                        To Post a message, send it to: scrumdevelopment@...
                                        To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
                                        scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...

                                        Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                      • Brad Appleton
                                        I wonder if some of this can be addressed using ideas similar to what Alistair used in Agile Software Development and his Crystal Methodologies... It seems
                                        Message 19 of 20 , May 15, 2002
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          I wonder if some of this can be addressed using ideas similar to what Alistair used in 'Agile Software Development" and his Crystal Methodologies...

                                          It seems to me that Mike has perhaps found a new "niche" or "family" of methodologies that mix XP and SCRUM together in project-specific ways based on some project-specific parameters for certain tradeoff conditions (optimizing for reuse versus for ???).

                                          I wonder where on the spectrum of Crystal methods the particular set of conditions are that lead to this 'family of methods' that has the intersection of SCRUM+XP as its basis? I think it is probably not a problem to have a separate name to identify this "space" rooted at the intersection, and having a name for specific instantiation that is optimized for certain conditions seems fine too so long as it isn't claiming to be a brand new methodology (rather, its a named variation or 'flavor' in this particular 'family' or 'subfamily' within the agile methodology space).

                                          We still need names for all these things, they just don't all have to be in the same namespace at the same level of abstraction/granularity :)

                                          On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 05:19:59PM -0500, Mike Beedle wrote:
                                          >
                                          > Lowell Lindstrom wrote:
                                          > > > We use a different names for 2 main reasons:
                                          > > >
                                          > > > 1) out of respect for what XP and Scrum are,
                                          > > > because we don't like to say that we do is
                                          > > > XP or Scrum and then have someone pointing out
                                          > > > that XP or Scrum don't do things like we do.
                                          > > >
                                          > >
                                          > > I can definitely see wanting to avoid the "are you doing
                                          > > XP(Scrum)? debate." But you are doing XP and Scrum,
                                          > > plus MORE. What's interesting is the "more"
                                          > > part, that variance, not the XP and Scrum. That is
                                          > > where the attention should be. Naming the superset
                                          > > distracts from that.
                                          >
                                          > Lowell:
                                          >
                                          > I disagree. I feel it clarifies the purpose.
                                          >
                                          > The problem also is that is not only +more as you point
                                          > out above, but in many cases is:
                                          >
                                          > +more +modifying or specializing something in
                                          > Scrum or XP. For example, there are highly specialized
                                          > Scrum of Scrums in an XBreed environment, we don't
                                          > only care about Product Backlog, but about many
                                          > Backlogs with dependencies. So even when the
                                          > spirit of Scrum survives, the meeting is structured
                                          > around different buckets.
                                          >
                                          > Lowell Lindstrom wrote:
                                          > > > 2) and because we like to remember,
                                          > > > "special combinations" that lead to a desired
                                          > > > specialized result. In the case of XP@Scrum
                                          > > > is business value, and in the case of XBreed
                                          > > > is reusability. So we abstract these special
                                          > > > combinations with a name rather than tell people:
                                          > > >
                                          > >
                                          > > Thanks! I understand a little better. Somehow I missed
                                          > > that each had a different emphasis. I was under the
                                          > > impression that they were both simply different
                                          > > combinations of XP and Scrum.
                                          >
                                          > Unfortunately, Ken and I, and the people that we associate with
                                          > are typically on the trenches, so we have had little time
                                          > to explain things better.
                                          >
                                          > Lowell Lindstrom wrote:
                                          > > The name proliferation seems not agile to me. It introduces unnecessary
                                          > > complexity. Surely XBreed projects want business value and XP@Scrum
                                          > > projects want reuse. A better approach is to emphasize only what
                                          > > is unique, rather than the rename the whole set. What are
                                          > > the set of practices that when added to what we know as
                                          > > Scrum and XP lead to higher reuse? That is a set of practices that
                                          > > warrants a new label, not the superset. Same with XP@Scrum. What
                                          > > are the practices that when added to what we know as Scrum
                                          > > and XP deliver higher business value? Call that XP@Scrum (or BVD).
                                          > > If it is just XP, with Scrum replacing the planning game, just
                                          > > call it "XP with Scrum as the Planning Game" or "Scrum using
                                          > > XP Practices for the software development."
                                          >
                                          > Unfortunately, there are many modifications so it can't be
                                          > expressed by something as simple as:
                                          >
                                          > "XP with Scrum as the Planning Game"
                                          >
                                          > That is a starting point, and in fact, that's more or less
                                          > how XBreed started, but once the focus changed, the sentence
                                          > became a paragraph, the paragraph became a chapter, and
                                          > pretty soon you have something new.
                                          >
                                          > I suspect the same thing is going on with xp@Scrum.
                                          >
                                          > Lowell Lindstrom wrote:
                                          > > > In terms of names consider this: Monkeys and Humans have
                                          > > > a x > 99% overlap in their chromosome and gene sequences,
                                          > > > yet, this difference yields to very different animals.
                                          > > > However, as much as we are alike I don't think there
                                          > > > is any human that likes to be called a monkey
                                          > >
                                          > > Nicely phrased! Yes, I am aware that egos are involve here ;-).
                                          > > I just hope they can be kept in check enough not to
                                          > > kill the movement. A proliferation of differently names
                                          > > sets of methods that are basically identical has that
                                          > > risk associated with it.
                                          >
                                          > Well, I didn't mean to say anything related to egos.
                                          >
                                          > My point was that simple changes in the meta-architecture of
                                          > a system (genotype) can yield to big changes in the overall
                                          > structure of the instances (phenotype), and that they
                                          > may deserve a different abstraction - a different word.
                                          >
                                          > Actually, we did discuss "name proliferation" at our initial
                                          > meeting at Snowbird, and we encouraged each other to explore
                                          > and try new things without trying to "unify" things ;-)
                                          >
                                          > Diversity makes us stronger,
                                          >
                                          > - Mike
                                          >
                                          >
                                          > http://www.hipaaccelerator.com
                                          > We are hiring Java Developers, architects and project managers.
                                          > http://www.e-architects.com
                                          >
                                          > http://www.xbreed.net
                                          > http://www.agilescrum.com
                                          > http://www.livingmetaphor.org
                                          >
                                          > http://www.agilealliance.org
                                          >
                                          > http://www.mikebeedle.com
                                          >
                                          >
                                          > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                          > chicago-agile-dev-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                          >

                                          --
                                          Brad Appleton <brad@...> http://www.bradapp.net/
                                          "Education is the ability to listen to almost anything
                                          without losing your temper or your self-confidence."
                                          -- Robert Frost
                                        • Mike Beedle
                                          ... Brad: These are interesting thoughts indeed. Much to be worked by present and future agileers, - Mike
                                          Message 20 of 20 , May 16, 2002
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            Brad Appleton wrote:
                                            > I wonder if some of this can be addressed using
                                            > ideas similar to what Alistair used in
                                            > 'Agile Software Development" and his Crystal
                                            > Methodologies...
                                            >
                                            > It seems to me that Mike has perhaps found a new
                                            > "niche" or "family" of methodologies that mix
                                            > XP and SCRUM together in project-specific ways
                                            > based on some project-specific parameters
                                            > for certain tradeoff conditions (optimizing for
                                            > reuse versus for ???).
                                            > I wonder where on the spectrum of Crystal methods
                                            > the particular set of conditions are that lead to
                                            > this 'family of methods' that has the intersection
                                            > of SCRUM+XP as its basis? I think it is probably not
                                            > a problem to have a separate name to identify this
                                            > "space" rooted at the intersection, and having
                                            > a name for specific instantiation that is optimized
                                            > for certain conditions seems fine too so long as
                                            > it isn't claiming to be a brand new methodology
                                            > (rather, its a named variation or 'flavor' in
                                            > this particular 'family' or 'subfamily' within
                                            > the agile methodology space).
                                            >
                                            > We still need names for all these things, they
                                            > just don't all have to be in the same namespace
                                            > at the same level of abstraction/granularity :)

                                            Brad:

                                            These are interesting thoughts indeed.

                                            Much to be worked by present and future agileers,

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