Re: Removing a very abstract impediment: the two week sprint length
Based on reading three of your messages in the past few minutes, I must say I am liking the way you think. You seem to be very pragmatic while understanding agile principles well.
--- In email@example.com, Jayanthan Bhattathiripad <jynthn@...> wrote:
> I am not too hung up on iteration length but I am also not too hung up
> on a Product Owner changing a story mid-sprint as long as the old story
> was not worked on. In this case, perhaps get rid of some stories
> mid-iteration and replace with the promo story might be the way i would
> have done it. (and I am not saying its right)
> Adam Sroka wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 1:27 PM, tiagomjorge <tiagomjorge@...
> > <mailto:tiagomjorge%40gmail.com>> wrote:
> > > Any comments?
> > >
> > >
> > http://tiagomjorge.wordpress.com/2009/03/23/removing-abstract-impediment-two-week-sprint-length/
> > <http://tiagomjorge.wordpress.com/2009/03/23/removing-abstract-impediment-two-week-sprint-length/>
> > >
> > I think that the chosen response to the specific situation is valid.
> > There are also other valid responses, including at least:
> > 1) If we endeavor to always keep the code releasable then we could
> > continue to have two week iterations and release on the fixed date.
> > 2) We could switch to one week iterations for the three weeks prior to
> > the release. This would enable us to have more feedback before the
> > imminent release.
> > 3) Given the short amount of time between now and the release (Three
> > weeks) we could forgo iterations temporarily and simply do what we
> > feel is necessary to hit the release date.
> > I think that any of these approaches are valid. Personally, I would
> > prefer a combination of #1 and #2 (e.g. iterate more frequently, keep
> > the code always releasable... at least nightly if not continuously.)
> > The critical fact here is that the release is less than a month away.
> > If the release were more than a month away then changing our approach
> > would seem like an overreaction IMO.