Re: OOP/OOD Philosophy
- From: Michael Feathers <mfeathers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2005 12:09:02 GMT
krasicki wrote:
It is agile because the term 'extreme' as been so over-exposed that the audience for this stuff evaporated. So, to be honest it is called agile to remove the tarnish of the extreme labeling AND to emphasize peppiness rather than dwell on the ever-present short-comings of the pseudo-methodology.
Actually, it is agile because the word 'extreme' was a roadblock in some organizations. What we've been finding recently is that there are a many companies going agile who pick some agile method like Scrum and then start using XP practices to fill it in. There has actually been a net push towards XP practices over the past five years. Their worth
has clearly been recognized independently of their original packaging.
This is not responsible change management. This results in chaos and I have seen it in profoundly big companies whose platitudes, awards, and self-serving hype disguise the fact that beneath the covers employees were agile enough to artificially meet deadlines to cash in on bonuses while the quality of the software remains dubious to this day. Two weeks ago I came across multiple instances of Y2K errors introduced to code after the year 2000.
Agile to me means slippery and dodgy - I don't like it and it is unacceptable in mission critical scenarios. Today many corporations have had such fun laying off and off-shoring applications that no one seems to remember that if they collapse or are incorrectly functioning there will be unpleasnat consequences.
Baloney. Agile and Iterative methods are simply what many very good software developers have been doing behind the scenes for years. Gerald Weinberg is on record saying that Project Mercury at NASA was developed using a process that was pretty much indistinguishable from XP.
Michael Feathers author, Working Effectively with Legacy Code (Prentice Hall 2005) www.objectmentor.com .
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: OOP/OOD Philosophy
- From: krasicki
- Re: OOP/OOD Philosophy
- References:
- Re: OOP/OOD Philosophy
- From: krasicki
- Re: OOP/OOD Philosophy
- From: Michael Feathers
- Re: OOP/OOD Philosophy
- From: krasicki
- Re: OOP/OOD Philosophy
- From: Nick Malik [Microsoft]
- Re: OOP/OOD Philosophy
- From: krasicki
- Re: OOP/OOD Philosophy
- Prev by Date: Re: UML: Difference package/component
- Next by Date: Re: UML Question (Object <-> ObjectFinder?)
- Previous by thread: Re: OOP/OOD Philosophy
- Next by thread: Re: OOP/OOD Philosophy
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|