Re: [agilealliance] XP Plugin for RUP
- --- In scrumdevelopment@y..., "Ken Schwaber" <ken.schwaber@v...>
> The next step, of course, is for the plug-in to go to thedefined
> company's process group, where they will really nail it down as a
> process. This is a constant trend and evolution of things, from ageneral
> set of guidelines that require intelligence and collaboration tosomething
> that is considered "rent an intelligence", where you applied thedefined
> process that someone else wrote and figure that - since they saidit's ok -
> that you can just measure hours and report changes.You're a bitter, bitter man, Ken. ;->
It is true that many people think as you describe. It is also true
that many do not. The current very small software process group at
Ford, for example, chartered to help the company do RUP, is staffed
entirely by XP people. With XP identified as a valid form of RUP,
they are in a position to install the practices there.
My opinion is that we only learn that the "empirical" processes work
through experience. No amount of reasoning can convince us that
our "defined" process view is wrong.
So my thrust, wherever I go, is to get teams to try the agile
practices. Trying them, some of them, at least, will get it. I know
no better way, though I'd be happy to learn one.
We at OM had great concerns about doing the XP plug-in, for just the
reasons you mention. (And because we feared that none of you would
ever talk to us again.) My own view was simple: Rational clearly
would put XP under RUP. If that was to be the case, I felt that we
owed it to the universe to see that it was as good as possible.
We've done the first cut, and we're hoping that the agile community
will help us make it better.