Re: [scrumdevelopment] Re: basic question on SCRUM
- On many points we are actually in agreement. A couple of comments in line...
On 8/25/05, Ron Jeffries <ronjeffries@...> wrote:
> I haven't found anything that points to any core XP literature or
> site saying that the code is the documentation.
I guess it depends on what you mean by "core" XP literature. I noticed
a number of slide presentations where people were obviously trying to
teach XP to organizations that made this assertion (not just in the
book you cite). What you might consider is that for whatever reason,
individuals and companies are often *interpreting* XP to mean the end
of all (developer) documentation, just as some interpret RUP to mean
that you are *required* to generate hundreds of documents before you
code. Now if you happen to know anyone who writes books on XP who
could emphasize this a bit more...:-)
> One reason is that the traditional methods really intend that we
> should document, say, the design, because we're going to build the
> design first, using all those geniuses we apparently have somewhere,
> and then hand it off to code monkeys to build according to the
This characterization is unfortunate, and frankly reflects a bit of
the attitude that kept me from looking at agile processes for a long
time. You just did what you attribute to the author who was critical
of XP - you set up a straw man to knock down. I've worked in
environments from ad-hoc to agile to RUP. I've certainly encountered
"architects" with a bit of that attitude from time to time, but for
the most part regardless of process people were generally trying to
apply methods that they thought (rightly or wrongly) would stand the
best chance of bringing success to their project.
> Agile methods build design and code together, using normal humans
Actually, this is a point I am not yet certain about ("normal
humans"). There seem to me to be underlying assumptions to agile
practices, including Scrum, about the skills and character of the team
members on an *effective* team. XP requires a disciplined approach to
software development. If "normal" equates to "average", and I look
back over the developers I have worked with across the years, I can
identify very few that would or could thrive in that kind of
environment. There are others that from a cultural standpoint might
find it difficult to work in a team environment such as Scrum where
everyone shares responsibility and is expected to be assertive at
least to some extent. I would suspect that in many cases that agile
practices tend to weed out "average" developers resulting in teams of
people who are a bit above the norm.
Just a final note: I *am* a strong advocate of Scrum and many of the
practices you promoted in XP, and I spend a good deal of time daily
working to get them implemented in my current project (RUP based).
What I have found most intersesting is that when the team searches for
solutions, they almost always trend toward everything that agile
advocates: minimum documentation, more communication, less restrictive
processes, lighter-weight design methods, etc.
Doing extensive unit testing and TDD ..... not so much, but I'm
working on it. :-)
> To Post a message, send it to: scrumdevelopment@...
> To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...
> Yahoo! Groups Links