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

RE: [scrumdevelopment] Re: SCRUM & Change / Defect Management

Expand Messages
  • Eric Chamberlain
    I participated in an earlier thread in this group about Xplanner. I have not been a fan of it for Scrum since it is XP-oriented but in the earlier thread, it
    Message 1 of 23 , May 3, 2004
      I participated in an earlier thread in this group about Xplanner. I have
      not been a fan of it for Scrum since it is XP-oriented but in the earlier
      thread, it was explained to me that Xplanner can actually work out fine AS
      LONG AS you ignore the daily task work additions feature and just adjust the
      task length (i.e. the task-specific burndown).

      In this case, less is more. Not using the daily Xplanner feature to log
      progress means that you are left with the simplicity of just the time-left
      in the task.

      HTH.

      == Eric ==

      -----Original Message-----
      From: J. B. Rainsberger [mailto:jbrains@...]
      Sent: Monday, May 03, 2004 12:19 PM
      To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: Re: [scrumdevelopment] Re: SCRUM & Change / Defect Management

      w6rabbit wrote:
      > --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, "J. B. Rainsberger"
      > <jbrains@r...> wrote:
      >
      >>w6rabbit wrote:
      >>

      <snip />
      > This is exactly my point.
      > I only want them to re-estimate how much time is remaining and not get
      > caught up in "how much time did I spend on this."
      > But that does not appear, to me, to be how XPlanner works.

      I understand a bit better now. XPlanner expects you to track time spent
      rather than time remaining?

      > For something that I took to be specifically tailored for XP, that
      > seemed very odd to me.
      > I assume I'm misunderstanding something.

      I would venture over to the extremeprogramming list and ask them about it.
      They have experience with XPlanner that I don't have.

      >>>I can imagine requiring each to re-estimate the units left on a task,
      >>>but it's hard to imagine getting them to track their time daily
      >>>without a fight.
      >>
      >>At the end of the day, they look at the two or three tasks they're
      >>working on (this is an advanced practice, by the way -- one things
      > at a
      >>time is best) and estimate how much they have left to do, then
      > update
      >>that information. You have to fight them to do this? It takes less
      > than
      >>one minute per task.
      >
      > No. They are fine with this. It was XPlanner that I was confused on.

      Hm. Is there any way to hack XPlanner in the meantime to get it to work the
      way you (and I) would expect it to work?

      Good luck.

      (And people wonder why I stick with index cards and a wiki.)
      --
      J. B. Rainsberger,
      Diaspar Software Services
      http://www.diasparsoftware.com :: +1 416 791-8603 Let's write software that
      people understand



      To Post a message, send it to: scrumdevelopment@...
      To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
      scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...
      Yahoo! Groups Links
    • Steve Bate
      ... Joe and Brad, See... http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scrumdevelopment/message/3273 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scrumdevelopment/message/3295 and related
      Message 2 of 23 , May 3, 2004
        > From: "J. B. Rainsberger" <jbrains@...>
        > w6rabbit wrote:
        > <snip />
        > > This is exactly my point.
        > > I only want them to re-estimate how much
        > > time is remaining and not get caught up
        > > in "how much time did I spend on this."
        > > But that does not appear, to me, to be
        > > how XPlanner works.
        >
        > I understand a bit better now. XPlanner expects you to track time spent
        > rather than time remaining?

        Joe and Brad,

        See...

        http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scrumdevelopment/message/3273
        http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scrumdevelopment/message/3295

        and related messages in a recent thread on this topic.

        > > For something that I took to be specifically
        > > tailored for XP, that seemed very odd to me.
        > > I assume I'm misunderstanding something.
        >...

        I'm not sure why that's an odd XP feature. IIRC (I don't have the
        book in front of me right now) the Planning Extreme Programming book
        shows examples of time tracking.

        > >>>I can imagine requiring each to re-estimate
        > >>>the units left on a task, but it's hard to
        > >>>imagine getting them to track their time
        > >>>daily without a fight.
        > >>
        >...
        > >>that information. You have to fight them to do this? It takes less
        > > than one minute per task.
        > >
        > > No. They are fine with this. It was
        > > XPlanner that I was confused on.

        I'm curious why your developers are fine with daily updating of
        their remaining time estimates but they fight tracking actual time
        (again, for the purpose of calculating remaining time in the XPlanner
        context).

        > Hm. Is there any way to hack XPlanner in the meantime to get it to work
        > the way you (and I) would expect it to work?

        See the messages referenced above.

        Eventually I'd like to extend XPlanner so that the planning and
        tracking can be configured to handle a wide range of XP process
        variants. This (and a Scrum-specific web skin) should also make
        it an even better fit for Scrum teams.

        Regards,

        Steve
      • Ayerst, Tom
        ... The issue is that the effort expended has no definitive relationship with the remaining estimate to complete (ETC), the number can even be negative, i.e.
        Message 3 of 23 , May 4, 2004
          > -----Original Message-----
          > From: Steve Bate [mailto:steve@...]
          >
          ...

          >
          > I'm curious why your developers are fine with daily updating of
          > their remaining time estimates but they fight tracking actual time
          > (again, for the purpose of calculating remaining time in the XPlanner
          > context).

          The issue is that the effort expended has no definitive relationship with
          the remaining estimate to complete (ETC), the number can even be negative,
          i.e. after a day of effort the task ETC may have increased. As we are
          focused on the planning aspect of the process (will we complete the selected
          work this Sprint?) the only thing we need to track is ETC, not actuals.
          Psychologically it is easier to re-estimate a larger ETC at the end of a
          days work than explicitly record the fact that your estimate was wrong or
          that you haven't worked hard/smart enough.

          >
          > > Hm. Is there any way to hack XPlanner in the meantime to get it to work
          > > the way you (and I) would expect it to work?
          >
          > See the messages referenced above.

          We are not using Xplanner yet but plan to simply update the ETC each day, as
          described on the Xplanner site. I would just like it to be as simple as
          updating the actuals (especially in the IDE plug-ins). Even better would be
          to be able to turn off the actuals completely.

          >
          > Eventually I'd like to extend XPlanner so that the planning and
          > tracking can be configured to handle a wide range of XP process
          > variants. This (and a Scrum-specific web skin) should also make
          > it an even better fit for Scrum teams.

          Cool idea. Once I've finished my house move I would like to help (Though
          that date is moving out two days per calendar day!)

          Cheers

          Tom


          --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          The information contained herein is confidential and is intended solely for the
          addressee. Access by any other party is unauthorised without the express
          written permission of the sender. If you are not the intended recipient, please
          contact the sender either via the company switchboard on +44 (0)20 7623 8000, or
          via e-mail return. If you have received this e-mail in error or wish to read our
          e-mail disclaimer statement and monitoring policy, please refer to
          http://www.drkw.com/disc/email/ or contact the sender.
          --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        • Steve Bate
          ... Hi Tom, Right, most teams use XPlanner to calculate ETC based on the task effort estimate and the actual time worked (ETC = estimate - actual). However,
          Message 4 of 23 , May 4, 2004
            > > I'm curious why your developers are fine with daily updating of
            > > their remaining time estimates but they fight tracking actual time
            > > (again, for the purpose of calculating remaining time in the XPlanner
            > > context).
            >
            > The issue is that the effort expended has no definitive relationship with
            > the remaining estimate to complete (ETC), the number can even be negative,
            > i.e. after a day of effort the task ETC may have increased.

            Hi Tom,

            Right, most teams use XPlanner to calculate ETC based on the task effort
            estimate and the actual time worked (ETC = estimate - actual). However,
            ETC in XPlanner is always equal or greater than zero. If the actual would
            exceed the estimated effort, a new (larger) estimate is requested. A task
            can be reestimated at any time. After reestimation, the ETC might be larger
            or smaller.

            > As we are
            > focused on the planning aspect of the process (will we complete
            > the selected work this Sprint?) the only thing we need to track is ETC,
            > not actuals. Psychologically it is easier to re-estimate a larger ETC at
            > the end of a days work than explicitly record the fact that your estimate
            > was wrong or that you haven't worked hard/smart enough.

            I wondered if that last issue might be one of the sources of resistance
            to recording actuals.

            Our team uses ETC to track intra-iteration (we're an XP team) status. We
            generally use previous actuals and estimation accuracy during our planning
            activities although a task that's been significantly reestimated during
            an iteration might trigger a related discussion in the standup meeting.

            For example, we learned that we tend to underestimate web development
            stories and the team determined it was because the functional tests were
            difficult to write. This motivated us to improve our web testing
            framework. Other stories would tend to run over because they depended
            on obtaining business information from our parent company and we
            were often passed to several intermediate people while obtaining the
            data. Once we noticed the trend of those stories exceeded estimates
            and determined why, we worked with the parent company to create more
            efficient ways to obtain the data we needed. I believe that having
            hard evidence of the impact of these inefficiencies decreases the
            response time in addressing them.

            Ken Schwaber discussed the pros and cons of tracking actuals in
            http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scrumdevelopment/message/2832.

            I agree with Ken that it's not a silver bullet. Still, we have found
            the extra feedback to be useful.

            >...
            > > Eventually I'd like to extend XPlanner so that the planning and
            > > tracking can be configured to handle a wide range of XP process
            > > variants. This (and a Scrum-specific web skin) should also make
            > > it an even better fit for Scrum teams.
            >
            > Cool idea. Once I've finished my house move I would like to help (Though
            > that date is moving out two days per calendar day!)

            :) I completely understand. I'm constantly doing a time balancing act
            between my myriad activities and working on XPlanner. Although the Scrum
            skin could be created immediately, the advanced configurability will require
            some significant internal refactoring over several releases. OTOH, even with
            the current implementation, the skin could present a view that only tracks
            ETC. Like I said in a previous message, I've never used XPlanner in this way
            but there shouldn't be any major problems. If there are small problems,
            I'd be happy to make those changes to better support Scrum teams.

            Regards,

            Steve
          • Mike Beedle
            Sometimes keeping actuals is not a choice , is a mandatory: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scrumdevelopment/message/3300 mb ... From: Steve Bate
            Message 5 of 23 , May 4, 2004
              Message
              Sometimes keeping actuals is not a "choice", is a mandatory:
               
              mb


              -----Original Message-----
              From: Steve Bate [mailto:steve@...]
              Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 9:20 AM
              To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: RE: [scrumdevelopment] Re: SCRUM & Change / Defect Management

              > > I'm curious why your developers are fine with daily updating of
              > > their remaining time estimates but they fight tracking actual time
              > > (again, for the purpose of calculating remaining time in the XPlanner
              > > context).
              >
              > The issue is that the effort expended has no definitive relationship with
              > the remaining estimate to complete (ETC), the number can even be negative,
              > i.e. after a day of effort the task ETC may have increased.

              Hi Tom,

              Right, most teams use XPlanner to calculate ETC based on the task effort
              estimate and the actual time worked (ETC = estimate - actual). However,
              ETC in XPlanner is always equal or greater than zero. If the actual would
              exceed the estimated effort, a new (larger) estimate is requested. A task
              can be reestimated at any time. After reestimation, the ETC might be larger
              or smaller.

              > As we are
              > focused on the planning aspect of the process (will we complete
              > the selected work this Sprint?) the only thing we need to track is ETC,
              > not actuals. Psychologically it is easier to re-estimate a larger ETC at
              > the end of a days work than explicitly record the fact that your estimate
              > was wrong or that you haven't worked hard/smart enough.

              I wondered if that last issue might be one of the sources of resistance
              to recording actuals.

              Our team uses ETC to track intra-iteration (we're an XP team) status. We
              generally use previous actuals and estimation accuracy during our planning
              activities although a task that's been significantly reestimated during
              an iteration might trigger a related discussion in the standup meeting.

              For example, we learned that we tend to underestimate web development
              stories and the team determined it was because the functional tests were
              difficult to write. This motivated us to improve our web testing
              framework. Other stories would tend to run over because they depended
              on obtaining business information from our parent company and we
              were often passed to several intermediate people while obtaining the
              data. Once we noticed the trend of those stories exceeded estimates
              and determined why, we worked with the parent company to create more
              efficient ways to obtain the data we needed. I believe that having
              hard evidence of the impact of these inefficiencies decreases the
              response time in addressing them.

              Ken Schwaber discussed the pros and cons of tracking actuals in
              http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scrumdevelopment/message/2832.

              I agree with Ken that it's not a silver bullet. Still, we have found
              the extra feedback to be useful.

              >...
              > > Eventually I'd like to extend XPlanner so that the planning and
              > > tracking can be configured to handle a wide range of XP process
              > > variants. This (and a Scrum-specific web skin) should also make
              > > it an even better fit for Scrum teams.
              >
              > Cool idea.  Once I've finished my house move I would like to help (Though
              > that date is moving out two days per calendar day!)

              :) I completely understand. I'm constantly doing a time balancing act
              between my myriad activities and working on XPlanner. Although the Scrum
              skin could be created immediately, the advanced configurability will require
              some significant internal refactoring over several releases. OTOH, even with
              the current implementation, the skin could present a view that only tracks
              ETC. Like I said in a previous message, I've never used XPlanner in this way
              but there shouldn't be any major problems. If there are small problems,
              I'd be happy to make those changes to better support Scrum teams.

              Regards,

              Steve




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


            • Deb
              Agreed. For many of us, time reporting is mandated - usually not for the functioning of the team itself, but for management. I m of two minds as to whether
              Message 6 of 23 , May 4, 2004
                Agreed. For many of us, time reporting is mandated - usually not for
                the functioning of the team itself, but for management.

                I'm of two minds as to whether it's a bad thing to record time spent
                and time remaining in the same tool...

                In Scrum, I work hard to convince developers that I REALLY REALLY
                mean it, when I say "upate your estimates to reflect *real* time
                remaining". They have trouble believing that I DO want them to
                increase estimates when needed. One thing I'm always saying (to get
                them to lose the old habit of under-estimating) is "I don't care
                about your actuals". I never come back to them about actuals, and
                eventually they believe me...

                If I ask them to put "time spent" into the same tool as "time
                remaining", it /looks/ like I might be tracking their actuals vs
                estimates... will this make them hedge on the "time remaining"
                figures?

                And on the other hand, it's more convenient than having to open 2
                tools...
                ???


                --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Beedle" <beedlem@e...>
                wrote:
                > Sometimes keeping actuals is not a "choice", is a mandatory:
                > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scrumdevelopment/message/3300
                >
                > mb
              • Doug Swartz
                ... Of course, you re right, sometimes actuals are necessary. I think the point that Tom is making is that it makes more sense to most developers (myself,
                Message 7 of 23 , May 4, 2004
                  Tuesday, May 04, 2004, 10:54:17 AM, Mike Beedle wrote:

                  > Sometimes keeping actuals is not a "choice", is a mandatory:
                  > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scrumdevelopment/message/3300

                  Of course, you're right, sometimes actuals are necessary.

                  I think the point that Tom is making is that it makes more
                  sense to most developers (myself, anyway) to estimate a new
                  Estimated Time to Completion than to update ETC by attempting
                  to re-estimate the total task.





                  --

                  Doug Swartz
                  daswartz@...
                • w6rabbit
                  ... Steve, I ve appreciated your interacting on this. I see now, why you might want to track the original estimate for planning purposes at the next sprint
                  Message 8 of 23 , May 6, 2004
                    --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, Steve Bate <steve@x> wrote:
                    > Joe and Brad,
                    >
                    >
                    > Eventually I'd like to extend XPlanner so that the planning and
                    > tracking can be configured to handle a wide range of XP process
                    > variants. This (and a Scrum-specific web skin) should also make
                    > it an even better fit for Scrum teams.
                    >
                    Steve,

                    I've appreciated your interacting on this.
                    I see now, why you might want to track the
                    original estimate for planning purposes at
                    the next sprint meeting.

                    It turns out that it won't matter for me
                    for a while. My head IT guy doens't want to
                    install Apache on any of our servers.
                    I'm not sure what that's about, and he has
                    somewhat avoided the question. But I don't
                    want to irk him over such a small thing.
                    So look like we'll go a different direction.

                    We've got Deb's spreadsheet and I think that
                    will do us for a while anyway.

                    BTW, while I'm wrapping up this subject,
                    isn't there a way to provide a compiled version
                    of the app for common OSs for those who don't
                    want to set up a develpment environment to
                    recompile it? Might widen your market a bit.

                    Lastly, your required list only shows Ant,
                    but my understanding is that Ant requires Apache.
                    If so, you might want to list that up front
                    as a requirement. My IT people were a bit
                    put out after getting all the pieces on the
                    (IIS) web server to find that it needed
                    apache. They wished they had known that up front.

                    Thanks,
                    Brad.
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.