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

RE: [scrumdevelopment] Re: Brand names, XP, Scrum, Crystal, ...

Expand Messages
  • David Roberts
    Agreed. If only I could change the world... David Roberts InnovaSystems Intl (619) 955-5864 ________________________________ From:
    Message 1 of 71 , Jun 22, 2005
    • 0 Attachment

      Agreed. If only I could change the world…

       

      David Roberts

      InnovaSystems Intl

      (619) 955-5864

       


      From: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com [mailto: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com ] On Behalf Of Ron Jeffries
      Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2005 4:41 PM
      To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: Re: [scrumdevelopment] Re: Brand names, XP, Scrum, Crystal , ...

       

      On Tuesday, June 21, 2005, at 7:26:44 PM, David Roberts wrote:

      > The way the company sees it, a sprint delivers product at the end of
      > each month, and to some extent regardless of when it starts. The sprint
      > starts when we have the *latest* feedback from the last sprint to use as
      > requirements. There's obviously a dead zone in there where we could be
      > working on previously prioritized items.

      Yes ... seems inefficient, of course. Jeff Sutherland has been
      talking about overlapping the planning and the Sprint -- is that the
      type B Scrum in his parlance?  Until this most recent discussion and
      Jeff's article, it never entered my mind that people wouldn't be
      ready to say what to do next right after the Sprint, or even before.

      It would seem to me that most organizations are pretty hungry for
      more stuff, and that the team needs something to do, so that
      everyone would be all over being ready. I'm truly am surprised that
      teams apparently stick in this mode with a gap between Sprints.

      > The answer to your question and probably the entire topic is:
      > Organizational Constraints.

      Well ... OK ...

      > That's a little off topic, my recommendation is, if you are interested
      > in taking Ken's advice, do 30 day sprints, rather than one month (to be
      > confused with monthly). That's of course if I understood Ken correctly.

      I love Ken like a brother, but I think that 30 days is way too long
      to wait for feedback. I favor one-week iterations, or two weeks for
      teams with big legacy problems.

      > p.s. I think you're handsome and interesting ;)

      Uh oh. :)

      Ron Jeffries
      www.XProgramming.com
      Adapt, improvise, overcome.
        -- Gunnery Sergeant Tom Highway (Heartbreak Ridge)



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



    • David Roberts
      Agreed. If only I could change the world... David Roberts InnovaSystems Intl (619) 955-5864 ________________________________ From:
      Message 71 of 71 , Jun 22, 2005
      • 0 Attachment

        Agreed. If only I could change the world…

         

        David Roberts

        InnovaSystems Intl

        (619) 955-5864

         


        From: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com [mailto: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com ] On Behalf Of Ron Jeffries
        Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2005 4:41 PM
        To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: Re: [scrumdevelopment] Re: Brand names, XP, Scrum, Crystal , ...

         

        On Tuesday, June 21, 2005, at 7:26:44 PM, David Roberts wrote:

        > The way the company sees it, a sprint delivers product at the end of
        > each month, and to some extent regardless of when it starts. The sprint
        > starts when we have the *latest* feedback from the last sprint to use as
        > requirements. There's obviously a dead zone in there where we could be
        > working on previously prioritized items.

        Yes ... seems inefficient, of course. Jeff Sutherland has been
        talking about overlapping the planning and the Sprint -- is that the
        type B Scrum in his parlance?  Until this most recent discussion and
        Jeff's article, it never entered my mind that people wouldn't be
        ready to say what to do next right after the Sprint, or even before.

        It would seem to me that most organizations are pretty hungry for
        more stuff, and that the team needs something to do, so that
        everyone would be all over being ready. I'm truly am surprised that
        teams apparently stick in this mode with a gap between Sprints.

        > The answer to your question and probably the entire topic is:
        > Organizational Constraints.

        Well ... OK ...

        > That's a little off topic, my recommendation is, if you are interested
        > in taking Ken's advice, do 30 day sprints, rather than one month (to be
        > confused with monthly). That's of course if I understood Ken correctly.

        I love Ken like a brother, but I think that 30 days is way too long
        to wait for feedback. I favor one-week iterations, or two weeks for
        teams with big legacy problems.

        > p.s. I think you're handsome and interesting ;)

        Uh oh. :)

        Ron Jeffries
        www.XProgramming.com
        Adapt, improvise, overcome.
          -- Gunnery Sergeant Tom Highway (Heartbreak Ridge)



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



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