Search Results

Search found 1204 results on 49 pages for 'agile'.

Page 21/49 | < Previous Page | 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28  | Next Page >

  • Planning Poker and wordy developers

    - by Pomario
    My team is composed of 4 developers; all seasoned and skilled. One of them is a wordy, well intended chap who insists on defining the technical solution to our stories before we put down our estimates with Planning Poker. He refuses to estimate if he doesn't have a rough idea of the agreed technical solution (which sounds reasonable, right?). The problem is that our estimating sessions are taking forever to finish!! In your experience, how do you deal with this kind of personality when playing the planning poker?

    Read the article

  • What happens between sprints?

    - by Steve Bennett
    I'm working on a project loosely following the scrum model. We're doing two week sprints. Something I'm not clear on (and don't have a book to consult) is exactly what is supposed to happen between sprints: there should be some "wrap" process, where the product gets built and delivered, but: how long does this typically take? should the whole team be involved? does it strictly have to finish before developers start working on the next sprint items? is this when code review and testing take place? There are three developers, adding up to about 1 FTE. So the sprints are indeed very short.

    Read the article

  • What to do when there are no logical user stories but separate development tasks?

    - by Alex. S.
    We need to generate a release in 3 weeks, and for the planning we are doing today we don't have coherent logical user stories from the backlog tasks. Is valid to match say each development task is equivalent to an user story? Methodologically what is the correct way of handling this?, because anyway we are going to have standup meetings and we are going to control the progress of the project against those development tasks. For example, we have things like: . Adapt ETL to process numeric lists . Adjust licensing component . Remove DTC and so on. So, for the planning poker and iteration planning is valid to use those tasks? if not, what is the alternative?

    Read the article

  • How to implement Scrum in a company with three similar web-based products

    - by user1909034
    I am somewhat familiar with the concepts and benefits of Scrum. With that in mind, I am trying to improve the failing Scrum product management structure of a company I'm now working for that has three separate B2C products, catering to the same demographic and accessible on the same website. Each product has a product owner and a unique development team (5 - 9 people in each) behind it. Given that the target audiences are similar (not sure if it should matter) and the 3 web products are similar in nature, what are the potential benefits/risks associated with merging the teams and having just one product owner/scrum master/dev team? Some questions that come to mind are: does it make sense to have 3 product owners and three distinct backlogs if your website has three distinct products? Also, if you only have one product owner, what is the best metric off which to choose who that will be?

    Read the article

  • How can my team avoid frequent errors after refactoring?

    - by SDD64
    to give you a little background: I work for a company with roughly twelve Ruby on Rails developers (+/- interns). Remote work is common. Our product is made out of two parts: a rather fat core, and thin up to big customer projects built upon it. Customer projects usually expand the core. Overwriting of key features does not happen. I might add that the core has some rather bad parts that are in urgent need of refactorings. There are specs, but mostly for the customer projects. The worst part of the core are untested (as it should be...). The developers are split into two teams, working with one or two PO for each sprint. Usually, one customer project is strictly associated with one of the teams and POs. Now our problem: Rather frequently, we break each others stuff. Some one from Team A expands or refactors the core feature Y, causing unexpected errors for one of Team B's customer projects. Mostly, the changes are not announced over the teams, so the bugs hit almost always unexpected. Team B, including the PO, thought about feature Y to be stable and did not test it before releasing, unaware of the changes. How to get rid of those problems? What kind of 'announcement technique' can you recommend me?

    Read the article

  • Why is there a 20 and not 21 in some versions of Planning Poker?

    - by SuffixTreeMonkey
    In Planning Poker, cards usually contain numbers of the Fibonacci sequence, which is 0,1,1,2,3,5,8,13,21,34,55 etc. However, you can see on the Wikipedia page (and this has been confirmed to me by people that work at several positions where Planning Poker is applied) in some editions the cards stray away from Fibonacci sequence after 13. They lower 21 to 20 and then continue with 40 and 100. Is there some rationale on why these values have been changed, specifically 21 to 20? (Also note that some other cards are added, such as ? and 1/2, but these are easier for me to understand, compared to the 21 - 20 shift.)

    Read the article

  • In a team practicing Domain Driven Design, should the whole team participate in Stakeholder meetings?

    - by thirdy
    In my experience, a Software Development Team that comprises: 1 Project Manager 1 Tech Lead 1 - 2 Senior Dev 2 - 3 Junior Dev (Fresh grad) Only the Tech Lead & PM (and/or Senor Dev/s) will participate in a meeting with Clients, Domain Experts, Client's technical resource. I can think of the ff potential pitfalls: Important info gets lost Human error (TL/PM might forgot to disseminate info due to pressure or plain human error) Non-verbal info (maybe a presentation using a diagram presented by Domain Expert) Maintaining Ubiquitous language is harder to build since not all team members get to hear the non-dev persons Potential of creative minds are not fully realized (Personally, I am more motivated to think/explore when I am involved with these important meetings) Advantages of this approach: Only one point of contact Less time spent on meetings? Honestly, I am biased & against this approach. I would like to hear your opinions. Is this how you do it in your team? Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • Native mobile app development - how do I structure my user stories?

    - by richsage
    I'm about to start on a project which will involve developing prototype native mobile apps (iOS and Android initially) as well as a web-based admin interface and an API for these apps to communicate with. We've got a list of stories already drafted up, however a lot of them are in the format: As a mobile user I want to be able to view a login screen so that I can sign into the app If this were targeted for a single platform, I wouldn't see a problem. However, since we're targeting multiple platforms, I'm not sure whether these should now be duplicated eg "As an Android user" or similar. This seems like duplication, but it's work that will need to be completed separately for each platform. This is the first mobile project we've gone native on - previously it was Phonegap and we lumped all stories in under "As a mobile user". Since essentially this was a web-based app wrapped in native code, this didn't present too much of an issue, but I'm conscious that wholly-native apps are a different ballgame!

    Read the article

  • Many user stories share the same technical tasks: what to do?

    - by d3prok
    A little introduction to my case: As part of a bigger product, my team is asked to realize a small IDE for a DSL. The user of this product will be able to make function calls in the code and we are also asked to provide some useful function libraries. The team, together with the PO, put on the wall a certain number of user stories regarding the various libraries for the IDE user. When estimating the first of those stories, the team decided that the function call mechanism would have been an engaging but not completely obvious task, so the estimate for that user story raised up from a simple 3 to a more dangerous 5. Coming to the problem: The team then moved to the user stories regarding the other libraries, actually 10 stories, and added those 2 points of "function call mechanism" thing to each of those user story. This immediately raised up the total points for the product of 20 points! Everyone in the team knows that each user story could be picked up by the PO for the next iteration at any time, so we shouldn't isolate that part in one user story, but those 20 points feel so awfully unrealistic! I've proposed a solution, but I'm absolutely not satisfied: We created a "Design story" and put those annoying 2 points over it. However when we came to realize and demonstrate it to our customers, we were unable to show something really valuable for them about that story! Here the problem is whether we should ignore the principle of having isolated user stories (without any dependency between them). What would you do, or even better what have you done, in situations like this? (a small foot-note: following a suggestion I've moved this question from stackoverflow)

    Read the article

  • What methods of requirements elicitation are suitable when I do not have direct access to the user base?

    - by metadice
    I am working on an application to create invoices. There are some features that are required based on the type of the application and are common to all invoice applications. However, we still need to determine what unique needs the user base might have. We do not have direct access to the users to obtain requirements or user stories. What techniques are most suitable for eliciting high-quality requirements from users when direct or frequent access is not possible?

    Read the article

  • Are there studies about the disadvantages of using issue tracking systems? [closed]

    - by user1062120
    I don't like issue tracking systems because: It takes too much time to describe issues in it. This discourage its usage. You create a place to keep your bugs. And if there is a place for them, people usually don't care too much about fixing a bug cause they can put it there so that someday someone can fix it (or not). With time, the bug lists gets so long that nobody can deal with it anymore, taking up a lot of our time. I prefer handling issues using post-its on a white board, face-to-face conversations and killing important bugs as soon as they appear. I don't care too much to keep track of bug history because I don't think that it is worth the overhead. Am I alone here? Are there studies (book/article/whatever) about the disadvantages (or great advantages) of using issue tracking systems?

    Read the article

  • Facing quality issues

    - by juststartedmycareer
    A workforce management software has complex GUI (for example values in a page depends on the status (closed or open) of other pages). Only latest and near past development has test coverage. During our last release, we received lots of bugs from customer in-spite of 2 weeks of testing Sprint . We don't have dedicated test team. The developers does the unit test & User acceptance test. Every day triggers automated regression test. I am afraid the developers are not testing the entire workflow because its time consuming also not able to automate it because of its complexity. Any suggestions ?. The legacy code (15 yrs development) has less code coverage. How can I improve quality ? Note: Now not possible to hire testers to have independent test team!!

    Read the article

  • Scrum in a consulting environment?

    - by Darla
    Is it possible to introduce scrum to a consulting environment? On any given week I might belong to 4 different teams, each with a different PM, BA and dev team (I am a designer). It doesn't seem feasible, time wise, to be able to be part of that many teams/projects as there would need to be daily stand-ups for each, sprint reviews, etc. I should add these projects are not necessarily software, but mainly ecommerce web projects. Can someone who has done this speak to how you approach it?

    Read the article

  • Can an agile shop every really score 12 on the Joel Test?

    - by Simon
    I really like the Joel test, use it myself, and encourage my staff and interviewees to consider it carefully. However I don't think I can ever score more than 9 because a few points seem to contradict the Agile Manifesto, XP and TDD, which are the bedrocks of my world. Specifically the questions about schedule, specs, testers and quiet working conditions run counter to what we are trying to create and the values that we have adopted in being genuinely agile. So my question is whether it is possible for a true Agile shop to score 12?

    Read the article

  • Scrum - Responding to traditional RFPs

    - by Todd Charron
    Hi all, I've seen many articles about how to put together Agile RFP's and negotiating agile contracts, but how about if you're responding to a more traditional RFP? Any advice on how to meet the requirements of the RFP while still presenting an agile approach? A lot of these traditional RFP's request specific technical implementations, timelines, and costs, while also requesting exact details about milestones and how the technical solutions will be implemented. While I'm sure in traditional waterfall it's normal to pretend that these things are facts, it seems wrong to commit to something like this if you're an agile organization just to get through the initial screening process. What methods have you used to respond to more traditional RFP's? Here's a sample one grabbed from google, http://www.investtoronto.ca/documents/rfp-web-development.pdf Particularly, "3. A detailed work plan outlining how they expect to achieve the four deliverables within the timeframe outlined. Plan for additional phases of development." and "8. The detailed cost structure, including per diem rates for team members, allocation of hours between team members, expenses and other out of pocket disbursements, and a total upset price."

    Read the article

  • A more flexible and agile compiled language - possible?

    - by sdudo
    I have a short question that I have been thinking about for some time now so why shouldn't I ask it here on SO: Is it theoretically possible to create a compiled, yet more agile, flexible and rapid-development-friendly language? If so: Where would be the pros and cons? Why isn't there one yet?

    Read the article

  • « Le TDD est mort » pour le créateur de Ruby on rails, une position qui divise la communauté agile

    Le TDD est mort ? Non, pas vraiment, peut-être que oui La communauté agile taraudée par un débat autour du TDD« Le TDD est mort ? Ou pas ? » Telle est la question qui taraude l'esprit de la communauté agile en ce moment, vu l'importance du TDD (Test Driven Development ? Développement piloté par les tests) dans l'une des méthodes agiles les plus réputées : la méthode XP.À l'origine de ce débat houleux, David Heinemeier Hansson (DHH) auteur de Ruby on rails et fondateur du Basecamp et ses deux posts...

    Read the article

  • Le département américain de la défense adopte agile et la méthode Scrum, sous les conseils de Jeff Sutherland, inventeur de Scrum

    Le département américain de la défense adopte agile et la méthode Scrum Sous les conseils de Jeff Sutherland inventeur de ScrumAgile séduit de plus en plus de professionnels de l'IT, après son adoption par Microsoft c'est au tour du puissant département américain de la défense (DoD), qui passera d'un modèle en cascade à un modèle agile basé sur la méthode Scrum, sous les conseils avisés du docteur Jeff Sutherland, inventeur de la méthode et actuel PDG de Scrum Inc.A l'origine de cette initiative,...

    Read the article

  • Recommendations for project management software for Scrum

    - by Mendokusai
    We're using Scrum on our current project and we're very happy using our agile board and cards but reporting, burndown charts etc. are somewhat cumbersome to maintain. So, we're looking for good agile software to use instead. I'm keeping requirements deliberately vague but does anyone have any recommendations? The software would need to run on Windows.

    Read the article

  • Agile web development with rails

    - by Steve
    Hi.. This code is from the agile web development with rails book.. I don't understand this part of the code... User is a model which has name,hashed_password,salt as its fields. But in the code they are mentioning about password and password confirmation, while there are no such fields in the model. Model has only hashed_password. I am sure mistake is with me. Please clear this for me :) User Model has name,hashed_password,salt. All the fields are strings require 'digest/sha1' class User < ActiveRecord::Base validates_presence_of :name validates_uniqueness_of :name attr_accessor :password_confirmation validates_confirmation_of :password validate :password_non_blank def self.authenticate(name, password) user = self.find_by_name(name) if user expected_password = encrypted_password(password, user.salt) if user.hashed_password != expected_password user = nil end end user end def password @password end def password=(pwd) @password = pwd return if pwd.blank? create_new_salt self.hashed_password = User.encrypted_password(self.password, self.salt) end private def password_non_blank errors.add(:password,"Missing password")if hashed_password.blank? end def create_new_salt self.salt = self.object_id.to_s + rand.to_s end def self.encrypted_password(password, salt) string_to_hash = password + "wibble" + salt Digest::SHA1.hexdigest(string_to_hash) end end

    Read the article

  • Agilist, Heal Thyself!

    - by Dylan Smith
    I’ve been meaning to blog about a great experience I had earlier in the year at Prairie Dev Con Calgary.  Myself and Steve Rogalsky did a session that we called “Agilist, Heal Thyself!”.  We used a format that was new to me, but that Steve had seen used at another conference.  What we did was start by asking the audience to give us a list of challenges they had had when adopting agile.  We wrote them all down, then had everybody vote on the most interesting ones.  Then we split into two groups, and each group was assigned one of the agile challenges.  We had 20 minutes to discuss the challenge, and suggest solutions or approaches to improve things.  At the end of the 20 minutes, each of the groups gave a brief summary of their discussion and learning's, then we mixed up the groups and repeated with another 2 challenges. The 2 groups I was part of had some really interesting discussions, and suggestions: Unfinished Stories at the end of Sprints The first agile challenge we tackled, was something that every single Scrum team I have worked with has struggled with.  What happens when you get to the end of a Sprint, and there are some stories that are only partially completed.  The team in question was getting very de-moralized as they felt that every Sprint was a failure as they never had a set of fully completed stories. How do you avoid this? and/or what do you do when it happens? There were 2 pieces of advice that were well received: 1. Try to bring stories to completion before starting new ones.  This is advice I give all my Scrum teams.  If you have a 3-week sprint, what happens all too often is you get to the end of week 2, and a lot of stories are almost done; but almost none are completely done.  This is a Bad Thing.  I encourage the teams I work with to only start a new story as a very last resort.  If you finish your task look at the stories in progress and see if there’s anything you can do to help before moving onto a new story.  In the daily standup, put a focus on seeing what stories got completed yesterday, if a few days go by with none getting completed, be sure this fact is visible to the team and do something about it.  Something I’ve been doing recently is introducing WIP (Work In Progress) limits while using Scrum.  My current team has 2-week sprints, and we usually have about a dozen or stories in a sprint.  We instituted a WIP limit of 4 stories.  If 4 stories have been started but not finished then nobody is allowed to start new stories.  This made it obvious very quickly that our QA tasks were our bottleneck (we have 4 devs, but only 1.5 testers).  The WIP limit forced the developers to start to pickup QA tasks before moving onto the next dev tasks, and we ended our sprints with many more stories completely finished than we did before introducing WIP limits. 2. Rather than using time-boxed sprints, why not just do away with them altogether and go to a continuous flow type approach like KanBan.  Limit WIP to keep things under control, but don’t have a fixed time box at the end of which all tasks are supposed to be done.  This eliminates the problem almost entirely.  At some points in the project (releases) you need to be able to burn down all the half finished stories to get a stable release build, but this probably occurs less often than every sprint, and there are alternative approaches to achieve it using branching strategies rather than forcing your team to try to get to Zero WIP every 2-weeks (e.g. when you are ready for a release, create a new branch for any new stories, but finish all existing stories in the current branch and release it). Trying to Introduce Agile into a team with previous Bad Agile Experiences One of the agile adoption challenges somebody described, was he was in a leadership role on a team he had recently joined – lets call him Dave.  This team was currently very waterfall in their ALM process, but they were about to start on a new green-field project.  Dave wanted to use this new project as an opportunity to do things the “right way”, using an Agile methodology like Scrum, adopting TDD, automated builds, proper branching strategies, etc.  The problem he was facing is everybody else on the team had previously gone through an “Agile Adoption” that was a horrible failure.  Dave blamed this failure on the consultant brought in previously to lead this agile transition, but regardless of the reason, the team had very negative feelings towards agile, and was very resistant to trying it out again.  Dave possibly had the authority to try to force the team to adopt Agile practices, but we all know that doesn’t work very well.  What was Dave to do? Ultimately, the best advice was to question *why* did Dave want to adopt all these various practices. Rather than trying to convince his team that these were the “right way” to run a dev project, and trying to do a Big Bang approach to introducing change.  He would be better served by identifying problems the team currently faces, have a discussion with the team to get everybody to agree that specific problems existed, then have an open discussion about ways to address those problems.  This way Dave could incrementally introduce agile practices, and he doesn’t even need to identify them as “agile” practices if he doesn’t want to.  For example, when we discussed with Dave, he said probably the teams biggest problem was long periods without feedback from users, then finding out too late that the software is not going to meet their needs.  Rather than Dave jumping right to introducing Scrum and all it entails, it would be easier to get buy-in from team if he framed it as a discussion of existing problems, and brainstorming possible solutions.  And possibly most importantly, don’t try to do massive changes all at once with a team that has not bought-into those changes.  Taking an incremental approach has a greater chance of success. I see something similar in my day job all the time too.  Clients who for one reason or another claim to not be fans of agile (or not ready for agile yet).  But then they go on to ask me to help them get shorter feedback cycles, quicker delivery cycles, iterative development processes, etc.  It’s kind of funny at times, sometimes you just need to phrase the suggestions in terms they are using and avoid the word “agile”. PS – I haven’t blogged all that much over the past couple of years, but in an attempt to motivate myself, a few of us have accepted a blogger challenge.  There’s 6 of us who have all put some money into a pool, and the agreement is that we each need to blog at least once every 2-weeks.  The first 2-week period that we miss we’re eliminated.  Last person standing gets the money.  So expect at least one blog post every couple of weeks for the near future (I hope!).  And check out the blogs of the other 5 people in this blogger challenge: Steve Rogalsky: http://winnipegagilist.blogspot.ca Aaron Kowall: http://www.geekswithblogs.net/caffeinatedgeek Tyler Doerkson: http://blog.tylerdoerksen.com David Alpert: http://www.spinthemoose.com Dave White: http://www.agileramblings.com (note: site not available yet.  should be shortly or he owes me some money!)

    Read the article

  • The Enterprise is a Curmudgeon

    - by John K. Hines
    Working in an enterprise environment is a unique challenge.  There's a lot more to software development than developing software.  A project lead or Scrum Master has to manage personalities and intra-team politics, has to manage accomplishing the task at hand while creating the opportunities and a reputation for handling desirable future work, has to create a competent, happy team that actually delivers while being careful not to burn bridges or hurt feelings outside the team.  Which makes me feel surprised to read advice like: " The enterprise should figure out what is likely to work best for itself and try to use it." - Ken Schwaber, The Enterprise and Scrum. The enterprises I have experience with are fundamentally unable to be self-reflective.  It's like asking a Roman gladiator if he'd like to carve out a little space in the arena for some silent meditation.  I'm currently wondering how compatible Scrum is with the top-down hierarchy of life in a large organization.  Specifically, manufacturing-mindset, fixed-release, harmony-valuing large organizations.  Now I understand why Agile can be a better fit for companies without much organizational inertia. Recently I've talked with nearly two dozen software professionals and their managers about Scrum and Agile.  I've become convinced that a developer, team, organization, or enterprise can be Agile without using Scrum.  But I'm not sure about what process would be the best fit, in general, for an enterprise that wants to become Agile.  It's possible I should read more than just the introduction to Ken's book. I do feel prepared to answer some of the questions I had asked in a previous post: How can Agile practices (including but not limited to Scrum) be adopted in situations where the highest-placed managers in a company demand software within extremely aggressive deadlines? Answer: In a very limited capacity at the individual level.  The situation here is that the senior management of this company values any software release more than it values developer well-being, end-user experience, or software quality.  Only if the developing organization is given an immediate refactoring opportunity does this sort of development make sense to a person who values sustainable software.   How can Agile practices be adopted by teams that do not perform a continuous cycle of new development, such as those whose sole purpose is to reproduce and debug customer issues? Answer: It depends.  For Scrum in particular, I don't believe Scrum is meant to manage unpredictable work.  While you can easily adopt XP practices for bug fixing, the project-management aspects of Scrum require some predictability.  My question here was meant toward those who want to apply Scrum to non-development teams.  In some cases it works, in others it does not. How can a team measure if its development efforts are both Agile and employ sound engineering practices? Answer: I'm currently leaning toward measuring these independently.  The Agile Principles are a terrific way to measure if a software team is agile.  Sound engineering practices are those practices which help developers meet the principles.  I think Scrum is being mistakenly applied as an engineering practice when it is essentially a project management practice.  In my opinion, XP and Lean are examples of good engineering practices. How can Agile be explained in an accurate way that describes its benefits to sceptical developers and/or revenue-focused non-developers? Answer: Agile techniques will result in higher-quality, lower-cost software development.  This comes primarily from finding defects earlier in the development cycle.  If there are individual developers who do not want to collaborate, write unit tests, or refactor, then these are simply developers who are either working in an area where adding these techniques will not add value (i.e. they are an expert) or they are a developer who is satisfied with the status quo.  In the first case they should be left alone.  In the second case, the results of Agile should be demonstrated by other developers who are willing to receive recognition for their efforts.  It all comes down to individuals, doesn't it?  If you're working in an organization whose Agile adoption consists exclusively of Scrum, consider ways to form individual Agile teams to demonstrate its benefits.  These can even be virtual teams that span people across org-chart boundaries.  Once you can measure real value, whether it's Scrum, Lean, or something else, people will follow.  Even the curmudgeons.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28  | Next Page >