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

Re: ScrumButt [was [Bad] Scrum ...]

Expand Messages
  • Kane Mar
    ... So why did you do it? Apologizing for something and then doing it anyway, makes me feel like you re being insincere. ... As part of my CSM training I often
    Message 1 of 30 , Feb 1, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, "Joseph Little" <jhlittle@...> wrote:
      > I would certainly agree. And thanks for raising the issue. And
      > apologies if I deflate the interest of some readers by changing the
      > subject line to a different metaphor.

      So why did you do it? Apologizing for something and then doing it anyway, makes me feel
      like you're being insincere.

      > I think it is a feature (not a bug) that Scrum does not *require
      > specific* engineering practices. But not continuously improving
      > Engineering practices is a form of ScrumButt ("we do Scrum, but...we
      > don't have any engineering practices"). Doing Scrum absolutely means
      > that you must improve engineering practices. Continuously!!!
      >
      > You and Martin (apparently) don't define what "a mess" means.

      As part of my CSM training I often talk about team etiquette. It's one of my favorite topics
      because it's such a simple thing to do, and the impact of good etiquette is tremendous.
      One practice of good team etiquette is to avoid the use of "You" because it's accusatory
      and can lead to overly defensive behavior. I can share that slide with you, if you wish.

      > I'll suggest two things to start with that might clean it up:
      > (1) A story is not done until all bugs are fixed (very soon this
      > almost always means you must have more automated testing).
      > (2) Somewhere in every story we must do some refactoring of the code.
      > Should be part of the definition of done. That DoD is *very* important.

      Sure, we all pretty much agree on the basics. And, having been through the adoption
      cycles for both XP and Scrum, I certainly agree that it's a strength rather than a weakness.

      I decided to refer to Martins article because I feel that it's an important topic, and I've
      recently read several variations on this theme. Personally, I feel that Martin's post is the
      best of them because it's well written and he doesn't try to point blame. In fact he goes out
      of his way to say that it's a problem that's bigger than Scrum.

      Best regards,
      Kane Mar
      http://KaneMar.com | http://www.linkedin.com/in/kanemar
      http://www.twitter.com/Kane_Mar | http://www.twitter.com/AgileCarnival
    • Kane Mar
      ... Hi Amanda, That s a very interesting statement. Would you can to elaborate on it? Best regards, Kane Mar http://KaneMar.com |
      Message 2 of 30 , Feb 1, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, Amanda Abelove <amanda@...> wrote:
        >
        > I saw that. I still say that Scrum adoption is largely an issue of poor
        > branding and marketing.

        Hi Amanda,

        That's a very interesting statement. Would you can to elaborate on it?

        Best regards,
        Kane Mar
        http://KaneMar.com | http://www.linkedin.com/in/kanemar
        http://www.twitter.com/Kane_Mar | http://www.twitter.com/AgileCarnival
      • Kane Mar
        Hi George, ... This is a terrific post! I ve read the above 4 paragraphs about three times and each time I find something new. Great stuff! ... Yes, I think
        Message 3 of 30 , Feb 1, 2009
        • 0 Attachment
          Hi George,

          --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, George Dinwiddie <lists@...> wrote:
          > The answer is simple and obvious--improve the technical engineering
          > practice. The way to do that is not so easy, however.
          >
          > For example, Tim Walker suggests "Attention to technical excellence and
          > hiring motivated people are required for it to be successful." As true
          > as this is, it's no way for an organization to get from where it is to a
          > desired state of being able to reliably create desired functionality in
          > their software.
          >
          > People cannot suddenly be attentive to technical excellence. They must
          > slowly acquire the awareness and deeper understanding that they lack, or
          > they would already be attentive. Hiring motivated people suggests that
          > those doing the hiring will suddenly be able to understand what sort of
          > motivation is required, how to discern it in candidates, and follow
          > through with this criteria in preference to the criteria they've been using.
          >
          > And what would you do with the people you have now? Those that are
          > presumably not motivated toward technical excellence? Fire them all and
          > replace them? This is the HR equivalent to the total rewrite of a
          > legacy application, and it has some of the same problems. There is a
          > lot of domain knowledge hidden in there--knowledge that would be
          > difficult to find written down anywhere. The new must achieve the
          > competency of the old before it can begin to surpass it--until then, no
          > benefit is seen. The new will be starting in the same context as the
          > old, and therefore is likely to produce something with a similar
          > organization (or lack thereof).

          This is a terrific post! I've read the above 4 paragraphs about three times and each time I
          find something new. Great stuff!

          > The bottom line is that the developers have to learn to /recognize/ what
          > is "better," they have to learn how to /do/ it, and the cultural context
          > in which they work has to change such that it really is important enough
          > to have happen. Depending on where you start, that's a lot to change
          > all at once. It can take a lot of time and energy.

          Yes, I think you've spot on with the bottom line. It simply isn't enough to recognize
          'better', learn how to do it, and change the cultural context ... rather *all* these things
          need to happen to make any lasting impact. A lot of time and energy indeed! =)

          Best regards,
          Kane Mar
          http://KaneMar.com | http://www.linkedin.com/in/kanemar
          http://www.twitter.com/Kane_Mar | http://www.twitter.com/AgileCarnival
        • Amanda Abelove
          Totally! But let s take the discussion offline, since this isn t a product management or marketing related list and will therefore probably annoy everyone
          Message 4 of 30 , Feb 1, 2009
          • 0 Attachment
            Totally! But let's take the discussion offline, since this isn't a product management or marketing related list and will therefore probably annoy everyone collectively :-)

            Amanda

            On Sun, Feb 1, 2009 at 4:02 PM, Kane Mar <kane_sfo@...> wrote:

            --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, Amanda Abelove <amanda@...> wrote:
            >
            > I saw that. I still say that Scrum adoption is largely an issue of poor
            > branding and marketing.

            Hi Amanda,

            That's a very interesting statement. Would you can to elaborate on it?

            Best regards,
            Kane Mar
            http://KaneMar.com | http://www.linkedin.com/in/kanemar
            http://www.twitter.com/Kane_Mar | http://www.twitter.com/AgileCarnival


          • Adam Sroka
            ... I am interested, and I would suggest that it is fine to post it here if it is pertinent to the practice of Scrum/Agile. It sounded like it was.
            Message 5 of 30 , Feb 1, 2009
            • 0 Attachment
              On Sun, Feb 1, 2009 at 5:13 PM, Amanda Abelove <amanda@...> wrote:
              > Totally! But let's take the discussion offline, since this isn't a product
              > management or marketing related list and will therefore probably annoy
              > everyone collectively :-)
              >

              I am interested, and I would suggest that it is fine to post it here
              if it is pertinent to the practice of Scrum/Agile. It sounded like it
              was.
            • Amanda Abelove
              How about I hate posting things voicing minority opinions on the Internet that get googled and brought up in job interviews I ll cc you.
              Message 6 of 30 , Feb 1, 2009
              • 0 Attachment
                How about "I hate posting things voicing minority opinions on the Internet that get googled and brought up in job interviews"

                I'll cc you.

                On Sun, Feb 1, 2009 at 5:17 PM, Adam Sroka <adam.sroka@...> wrote:

                On Sun, Feb 1, 2009 at 5:13 PM, Amanda Abelove <amanda@...> wrote:
                > Totally! But let's take the discussion offline, since this isn't a product
                > management or marketing related list and will therefore probably annoy
                > everyone collectively :-)
                >

                I am interested, and I would suggest that it is fine to post it here
                if it is pertinent to the practice of Scrum/Agile. It sounded like it
                was.

              • Kane Mar
                ... Sounds good. I m looking forward to your email. Best regards, Kane Mar http://KaneMar.com | http://www.linkedin.com/in/kanemar
                Message 7 of 30 , Feb 1, 2009
                • 0 Attachment
                  --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, Amanda Abelove <amanda@...> wrote:
                  > Totally! But let's take the discussion offline, since this isn't a product
                  > management or marketing related list and will therefore probably annoy
                  > everyone collectively :-)

                  Sounds good. I'm looking forward to your email.

                  Best regards,
                  Kane Mar
                  http://KaneMar.com | http://www.linkedin.com/in/kanemar
                  http://www.twitter.com/Kane_Mar | http://www.twitter.com/AgileCarnival
                • georgievh
                  Dear Amanda, I am a newbie in Scrum and will probably not be able to contribute to the debate. However, I am interested in the topic. Could you, please cc me
                  Message 8 of 30 , Feb 1, 2009
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Dear Amanda,

                    I am a newbie in Scrum and will probably not be able to contribute to
                    the debate. However, I am interested in the topic.

                    Could you, please cc me too?


                    Regards,

                    Hristo




                    --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, Amanda Abelove <amanda@...>
                    wrote:
                    >
                    > How about "I hate posting things voicing minority opinions on the
                    Internet
                    > that get googled and brought up in job interviews"
                    >
                    > I'll cc you.
                    >
                    > On Sun, Feb 1, 2009 at 5:17 PM, Adam Sroka <adam.sroka@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > > On Sun, Feb 1, 2009 at 5:13 PM, Amanda Abelove
                    <amanda@...<amanda%40scrumclub.org>>
                    > > wrote:
                    > > > Totally! But let's take the discussion offline, since this isn't a
                    > > product
                    > > > management or marketing related list and will therefore probably
                    annoy
                    > > > everyone collectively :-)
                    > > >
                    > >
                    > > I am interested, and I would suggest that it is fine to post it here
                    > > if it is pertinent to the practice of Scrum/Agile. It sounded like it
                    > > was.
                    > >
                    > >
                    >
                  • Stephen Palmer
                    Absolutely! Agile processes, Scrum or otherwise, make it harder to hide poor quality people and teams behind process compliance. Steve
                    Message 9 of 30 , Feb 2, 2009
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Absolutely! Agile processes, Scrum or otherwise, make it harder to hide
                      poor quality people and teams behind process compliance.

                      Steve

                      Nancy Dirgo wrote:
                      > Tim,
                      >
                      > I totally agree. If you don't have he team and discipline as well as
                      > the motivation, SCRUM won't get you there. I've been doing software
                      > development now for 25 years and have used many different processes.
                      > The people make the difference.
                      >
                      > Nancy
                      >
                      > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      > *From:* Tim Walker <walketim@...>
                      > *To:* scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
                      > *Sent:* Friday, January 30, 2009 6:38:04 AM
                      > *Subject:* Re: [scrumdevelopment] Flaccid Scrum ...
                      >
                      > Scrum is not enough. Attention to technical excellence and hiring
                      > motivated people are required for it to be successful. It's no silver
                      > bullet and absence adherence to the values and principles we might,
                      > indeed, be better off with a different process.
                      >
                      > Tim
                      >
                      > On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 8:32 PM, Kane Mar <kane_sfo@yahoo. com
                      > <mailto:kane_sfo%40yahoo.com>> wrote:
                      > > Martin Fowler has written a thought provoking article on, what he calls,
                      > > FlaccidScrum. In a
                      > > nutshell he's seeing projects that have adopted Scrum, make quick
                      > progress
                      > > and then "After a
                      > > while progress is slow because the code base is a mess. What's
                      > happened is
                      > > that they haven't
                      > > paid enough attention to the internal quality of their software."
                      > >
                      > > In defense of Scrum Martin also points out, "prominent Scrummers they've
                      > > always
                      > > emphasized that you must have good technical practices."
                      > >
                      > > I personally think that he makes a good point, and his article is a
                      > timely
                      > > reminder that good
                      > > engineering practices (Continuous Integration, TDD and Refactoring)
                      > are all
                      > > very important.
                      > >
                      > > Anyway, here's the article: http://martinfowler .com/bliki/
                      > FlaccidScrum. html <http://martinfowler.com/bliki/FlaccidScrum.html>
                      > >
                      > > Best regards,
                      > > Kane Mar
                      > > http://KaneMar. com <http://KaneMar.com> | http://www.linkedin
                      > .com/in/kanemar <http://www.linkedin.com/in/kanemar>
                      > > http://www.twitter. com/Kane_ Mar <http://www.twitter.com/Kane_Mar>
                      > | http://www.twitter. com/AgileCarniva l
                      > <http://www.twitter.com/AgileCarnival>
                      > >
                      > >
                      >
                      >
                    • Brad Appleton
                      Doesnt Scrum also prescribe (or at least REALLY STRONGLY recommend) at least daily integration and test-automation? I could swear I remember reading that in
                      Message 10 of 30 , Feb 2, 2009
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Doesnt Scrum also prescribe (or at least REALLY STRONGLY recommend) at
                        least daily integration and test-automation? I could swear I remember
                        reading that in the first Scrum book from Schwaber and Beedle?

                        I'm curious as to how often this problem is encountered even in the face
                        of daily/nightly builds and test-automation (but not necessarily
                        "continuous" integration, and no TDD, despite the string test-automation).

                        What Ive seen is that even with the above (but no refactoring and TDD),
                        the problem can still very easily happen. The recent book "Emergent
                        Design" suggests that the discipline of Emergent Design (which includes
                        both TDD and Refactoring) is the bare minimum in technical practices
                        that are needed in conjunction with Scrum (no mention of pairing, tho it
                        is often easiest to teach and grow refactoring expertise thru pairing).

                        --
                        Brad Appleton <brad {AT} bradapp.net>
                        Agile CM Environments (http://blog.bradapp.net/)
                        & Software CM Patterns (www.scmpatterns.com)
                        "And miles to go before I sleep" -- Robert Frost
                      • Amanda Abelove
                        Sigh... I just figure it is easier to start a badass user group with some awesome tricks than try to do a million things with a user forum. Since this stuff is
                        Message 11 of 30 , Feb 2, 2009
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Sigh... I just figure it is easier to start a badass user group with some awesome tricks than try to do a million things with a user forum. Since this stuff is part of my job, I want it to be cooler and easier to get by the brass.

                          Watch this space around the beginning of March: http://scrumclub.org

                          On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 5:50 AM, Stephen Palmer <stephen.palmer@...> wrote:


                          Absolutely! Agile processes, Scrum or otherwise, make it harder to hide
                          poor quality people and teams behind process compliance.

                          Steve

                          Nancy Dirgo wrote:
                          > Tim,
                          >
                          > I totally agree. If you don't have he team and discipline as well as
                          > the motivation, SCRUM won't get you there. I've been doing software
                          > development now for 25 years and have used many different processes.
                          > The people make the difference.
                          >
                          > Nancy
                          >
                          > ----------------------------------------------------------
                          > *From:* Tim Walker <walketim@...>
                          > *To:* scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
                          > *Sent:* Friday, January 30, 2009 6:38:04 AM
                          > *Subject:* Re: [scrumdevelopment] Flaccid Scrum ...
                          >
                          > Scrum is not enough. Attention to technical excellence and hiring
                          > motivated people are required for it to be successful. It's no silver
                          > bullet and absence adherence to the values and principles we might,
                          > indeed, be better off with a different process.
                          >
                          > Tim
                          >
                          > On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 8:32 PM, Kane Mar <kane_sfo@yahoo. com
                          > <mailto:kane_sfo%40yahoo.com>> wrote:
                          > > Martin Fowler has written a thought provoking article on, what he calls,
                          > > FlaccidScrum. In a
                          > > nutshell he's seeing projects that have adopted Scrum, make quick
                          > progress
                          > > and then "After a
                          > > while progress is slow because the code base is a mess. What's
                          > happened is
                          > > that they haven't
                          > > paid enough attention to the internal quality of their software."
                          > >
                          > > In defense of Scrum Martin also points out, "prominent Scrummers they've
                          > > always
                          > > emphasized that you must have good technical practices."


                          > >
                          > > I personally think that he makes a good point, and his article is a
                          > timely
                          > > reminder that good
                          > > engineering practices (Continuous Integration, TDD and Refactoring)
                          > are all
                          > > very important.
                          > >
                          > > Anyway, here's the article: http://martinfowler .com/bliki/
                          > FlaccidScrum. html <http://martinfowler.com/bliki/FlaccidScrum.html>
                          > >
                          > > Best regards,
                          > > Kane Mar
                          > > http://KaneMar. com <http://KaneMar.com> | http://www.linkedin
                          > .com/in/kanemar <http://www.linkedin.com/in/kanemar>
                          > > http://www.twitter. com/Kane_ Mar <http://www.twitter.com/Kane_Mar>
                          > | http://www.twitter. com/AgileCarniva l
                          > <http://www.twitter.com/AgileCarnival>
                          > >
                          > >
                          >
                          >


                        • Brad Appleton
                          ... I m struggling with trying to get some folks thru this as well. Despite drawing upon my wonderful list of quotes on simplicity at
                          Message 12 of 30 , Feb 2, 2009
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Stephen Bobick wrote:
                            > I've seen this "flaccid Scrum" before as well, and usually the culprit
                            > is (mis)use of the KISS principle and an aversion to the principal of
                            > agressive and regular refactoring.

                            I'm struggling with trying to get some folks thru this as well. Despite
                            drawing upon my wonderful list of "quotes" on simplicity at
                            http://blog.bradapp.net/2006/05/simple-aint-easy-myths-and.html

                            I still run into the misinterpretation of "Simple" as being easy to do
                            today/now rather than being simple to change/evolve over the long hall
                            (i.e. minimizing TOTAL work (today + tomorrow) rather than minimizing
                            CURRENT efforts.)

                            Maarten Volder's does a good job of describing the misconception at
                            http://www.maartenvolders.com/blog/2008/09/simplicity-and-why-it-matters.html

                            --
                            Brad Appleton <brad {AT} bradapp.net>
                            Agile CM Environments (http://blog.bradapp.net/)
                            & Software CM Patterns (www.scmpatterns.com)
                            "And miles to go before I sleep" -- Robert Frost
                          • Mitch Lacey
                            Hello Adam, Sorry to chime in a little late, but the topic of fixing defects into a Sprint is a bit of a perplexing one. I ve wrestled with this and have a
                            Message 13 of 30 , Feb 2, 2009
                            • 0 Attachment

                              Hello Adam,

                               

                              Sorry to chime in a little late, but the topic of fixing defects into a Sprint is a bit of a perplexing one.

                               

                              I’ve wrestled with this and have a chapter on it for my upcoming book.

                               

                              One of the rules we have on the list is no spamming of blog posts or URL’s to drive traffic to our websites, but I talked to Ken about it and he’s OK with me sharing.

                               

                              You can check out the draft chapter here:

                              http://tinyurl.com/chghy5

                               

                              Please provide feedback on the chapter, it’s fresh off the press.

                               

                              Mitch

                               

                              From: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com [mailto:scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Adam Sroka
                              Sent: Friday, January 30, 2009 3:26 PM
                              To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
                              Subject: Re: [scrumdevelopment] Re: ScrumButt [was [Bad] Scrum ...]

                               

                              On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 5:39 AM, Joseph Little <jhlittle@...> wrote:

                              > Hi Kane,
                              >
                              > I would certainly agree. And thanks for raising the issue. And
                              > apologies if I deflate the interest of some readers by changing the
                              > subject line to a different metaphor.
                              >

                              Hehe. You said "deflate".

                              > I think it is a feature (not a bug) that Scrum does not *require
                              > specific* engineering practices. But not continuously improving
                              > Engineering practices is a form of ScrumButt ("we do Scrum, but...we
                              > don't have any engineering practices"). Doing Scrum absolutely means
                              > that you must improve engineering practices. Continuously!!!
                              >
                              > You and Martin (apparently) don't define what "a mess" means.
                              I'll
                              > suggest two things to start with that might clean it up:
                              > (1) A story is not done until all bugs are fixed (very soon this
                              > almost always means you must have more automated testing).
                              > (2) Somewhere in every story we must do some refactoring of the code.
                              > Should be part of the definition of done. That DoD is *very* important.
                              >

                              Yes, but, having been there myself:

                              1) We can't possibly fix all of the existing (production) bugs in a
                              single iteration. Would it be okay if we increased the length of our
                              iterations? Add an "iteration 0" so that we can assess the impact to
                              existing production code of every new effort?

                              2) I don't know what is going to break if I refactor this stuff,
                              because there are no tests. Can we create "technical stories" so that
                              we can go on refactoring crusades? Can we greatly inflate our
                              estimates, because we don't know what is going to break?

                              And, I'll add another "but" to the pile:

                              What do we do if some parts of the team are willing to adopt
                              "engineering practices" and others resist? In my experience (And I'm
                              an "XP guy") "engineering practices" only work team wide. If most of
                              the team are doing TDD, continuous integration, pairing, etc, and one
                              or two guys are sneaking in untested code, velocity will grind to a
                              standstill while the "good guys" attempt to clean up after the bad.

                              > One more thing, somewhat different to what Martin was getting at:
                              > * we must also have continuous improvement in Business Value Engineering.
                              >
                              > If we can't provide evidence that we are getting better and better at
                              > delivering BV, then what are we doing? Of course, many specific
                              > practices in this. More in another post.
                              >

                              What is the "business value" of cleaning up the huge mess of horrible
                              legacy code we've created over the past umpteen years? Does business
                              understand the value of adding tests? Does business understand the
                              value of eliminating bugs that don't have an immediate (known) impact
                              on the customer? Adding testing and refactoring to every story will
                              greatly reduce velocity (at least initially.) Will the business accept
                              this?

                            • Anthony Principato
                              Hello, My company is in the process of figuring out how we can better leverage Scrum techniques, disciplines and principles within our Data Center and
                              Message 14 of 30 , Feb 2, 2009
                              • 0 Attachment

                                Hello,

                                 

                                My company is in the process of figuring out how we can better leverage Scrum techniques, disciplines and principles within our Data Center and Infrastructure groups to better support Scrum/Agile Development teams. Can anyone please share their experiences, approaches with aligning the planning of Data Center and Infrastructure new and updated build outs of all environments up and through Disaster Recovery in preparation of Sprint Development efforts.  

                                What we are trying to do is align accordingly the timing of Infrastructure and Data Center build outs in direct relation with Development Sprint efforts so we can be better prepared for Sprint Development.

                                 

                                Questions we are asking ourselves:  

                                 

                                Do we time-box work effort processes by server type, number of servers so we can strive for velocity levels to communicate back to the business and development for release planning?

                                Do we create a Scrum Service Level Model so we can maintain a plug and play of Virtual Machine resources for all project release initiatives?

                                 

                                Any help would be appreciative.

                                 

                                Tony

                                  

                                  

                                 

                                -----Original Message-----
                                From: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com [mailto:scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Mitch Lacey
                                Sent: Monday, February 02, 2009 4:05 PM
                                To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
                                Subject: RE: [scrumdevelopment] Re: ScrumButt [was [Bad] Scrum ...]

                                 

                                Hello Adam,

                                 

                                Sorry to chime in a little late, but the topic of fixing defects into a Sprint is a bit of a perplexing one.

                                 

                                I’ve wrestled with this and have a chapter on it for my upcoming book.

                                 

                                One of the rules we have on the list is no spamming of blog posts or URL’s to drive traffic to our websites, but I talked to Ken about it and he’s OK with me sharing.

                                 

                                You can check out the draft chapter here:

                                http://tinyurl. com/chghy5

                                 

                                Please provide feedback on the chapter, it’s fresh off the press.

                                 

                                Mitch

                                 

                                From: scrumdevelopment@ yahoogroups. com [mailto:scrumdevelo pment@yahoogroup s.com] On Behalf Of Adam Sroka
                                Sent: Friday, January 30, 2009 3:26 PM
                                To: scrumdevelopment@ yahoogroups. com
                                Subject: Re: [scrumdevelopment] Re: ScrumButt [was [Bad] Scrum ...]

                                 

                                On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 5:39 AM, Joseph Little <jhlittle@mindspring .com> wrote:

                                > Hi Kane,
                                >
                                > I would certainly agree. And thanks for raising the issue. And
                                > apologies if I deflate the interest of some readers by changing the
                                > subject line to a different metaphor.
                                >

                                Hehe. You said "deflate".

                                > I think it is a feature (not a bug) that Scrum does not *require
                                > specific* engineering practices. But not continuously improving
                                > Engineering practices is a form of ScrumButt ("we do Scrum, but...we
                                > don't have any engineering practices"). Doing Scrum absolutely means
                                > that you must improve engineering practices. Continuously! !!
                                >
                                > You and Martin (apparently) don't define what "a mess" means.
                                I'll
                                > suggest two things to start with that might clean it up:
                                > (1) A story is not done until all bugs are fixed (very soon this
                                > almost always means you must have more automated testing).
                                > (2) Somewhere in every story we must do some refactoring of the code.
                                > Should be part of the definition of done. That DoD is *very* important.
                                >

                                Yes, but, having been there myself:

                                1) We can't possibly fix all of the existing (production) bugs in a
                                single iteration. Would it be okay if we increased the length of our
                                iterations? Add an "iteration 0" so that we can assess the impact to
                                existing production code of every new effort?

                                2) I don't know what is going to break if I refactor this stuff,
                                because there are no tests. Can we create "technical stories" so that
                                we can go on refactoring crusades? Can we greatly inflate our
                                estimates, because we don't know what is going to break?

                                And, I'll add another "but" to the pile:

                                What do we do if some parts of the team are willing to adopt
                                "engineering practices" and others resist? In my experience (And I'm
                                an "XP guy") "engineering practices" only work team wide. If most of
                                the team are doing TDD, continuous integration, pairing, etc, and one
                                or two guys are sneaking in untested code, velocity will grind to a
                                standstill while the "good guys" attempt to clean up after the bad.

                                > One more thing, somewhat different to what Martin was getting at:
                                > * we must also have continuous improvement in Business Value Engineering.
                                >
                                > If we can't provide evidence that we are getting better and better at
                                > delivering BV, then what are we doing? Of course, many specific
                                > practices in this. More in another post.
                                >

                                What is the "business value" of cleaning up the huge mess of horrible
                                legacy code we've created over the past umpteen years? Does business
                                understand the value of adding tests? Does business understand the
                                value of eliminating bugs that don't have an immediate (known) impact
                                on the customer? Adding testing and refactoring to every story will
                                greatly reduce velocity (at least initially.) Will the business accept
                                this?

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