Re:Agile: 5 years later and you're still doing it wrong
by mindcrime on Tuesday February 21, 2012 @07:09PM
(#3618585)
Second, let's get definitions straight. Agile is best practices around iterative and incremental development. The word is a marketing term and can cover all sorts of different (and contradictory) concepts.
When I hear the term "Agile" I think of no more or less than the principles from the Agile Manifesto. http://agilemanifesto.org/
I know some people translate "Agile" to a specific instance of Agile (Scrum, XP, Crystal, what-have-you) but I feel like that's a mistake. If somebody wants to criticize Scrum, I wish they'd criticize Scrum directly, not "Agile." Same for Crystal or XP or whatever.
Would I do pair programming all the time? Shit no, but does that mean I should make fun of it? Not unless I want to sound like an idiot in ten year's time.
Or, if you're anything like Steve Yegge, if you like engaging a lot of hyperbole to "stir the pot" and elicit discussion, or to make a point. I don't know if you read a lot of Steve's stuff or not, but his writing style is often loaded with hyperbole and is somewhat inflammatory.
Agile adoption has generated a lot of hate. That's a shame, because as Steve points out, there's good in there too. (Although he's not hitting on a lot here, the article is nicely done)
The thing with Steve is, you have to look beyond a lot of the specific things he says, and try to generalize to the overall point. That's not always easy and not everybody gets it. I know this well, as I tend to use a lot of hyperbole as well, and I often find people get hung up on the details and skip the more abstract bits. Whether using that style or not is a Good Thing is an exercise left for the reader. :~)
When I hear the term "Agile" I think of no more or less than the principles from the Agile Manifesto. http://agilemanifesto.org/
I know some people translate "Agile" to a specific instance of Agile (Scrum, XP, Crystal, what-have-you) but I feel like that's a mistake. If somebody wants to criticize Scrum, I wish they'd criticize Scrum directly, not "Agile." Same for Crystal or XP or whatever.
Would I do pair programming all the time? Shit no, but does that mean I should make fun of it? Not unless I want to sound like an idiot in ten year's time.
Or, if you're anything like Steve Yegge, if you like engaging a lot of hyperbole to "stir the pot" and elicit discussion, or to make a point. I don't know if you read a lot of Steve's stuff or not, but his writing style is often loaded with hyperbole and is somewhat inflammatory.
Agile adoption has generated a lot of hate. That's a shame, because as Steve points out, there's good in there too. (Although he's not hitting on a lot here, the article is nicely done)
The thing with Steve is, you have to look beyond a lot of the specific things he says, and try to generalize to the overall point. That's not always easy and not everybody gets it. I know this well, as I tend to use a lot of hyperbole as well, and I often find people get hung up on the details and skip the more abstract bits. Whether using that style or not is a Good Thing is an exercise left for the reader. :~)