This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Agile software development article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives:
1,
2,
3Auto-archiving period: 180 days
![]() |
![]() | Radiator (information) was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 09 August 2012 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Agile software development. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The content of this article has been derived in whole or part from
http://jaftalks.com/. Permission has been received from the copyright holder to release this material under both the
Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported license and the
GNU Free Documentation License. You may use either or both licenses. Evidence of this has been confirmed and stored by
VRT volunteers, under ticket number
2010051210011893. Note: Permission has been granted to incorporate content from this website under these licenses, but contributors to the article may determine through
consensus whether content so incorporated is appropriate for inclusion. This template is used by approved volunteers dealing with the Wikimedia volunteer response team system (VRTS) after receipt of a clear statement of permission at permissions-en ![]() |
Old fart here. I have spent 42 years in the mainframe industry, both as an all-round business analyst, database designer and developer and (last 10 years) database administrator. I retired in September, but found retirement a bit dull, so I have started up as a consultant. And now I have found that literally every company is going Agile. We're doing "standups" every morning, we have sprint planning sessions every two weeks, we have refinement sessions, we have PI's (program increments) consisting of 5 two-week sprints, and every PI – i.e. every 10 weeks – there is a two-day planning session with the whole IT department, 40–45 people. So, they are basically burning money, at least in my view; having 40–45 people in a two-day planning session consumes as many manhours as one person can do in about four months.
And now that I read about Agile, it says that the Waterfall model was criticized for "micromanaging". Eyeroll. I guess it could be, but that depends on the project leader. Agile appears to be micromanaging by design.
I'm an impatient person and I'm used to rolling up my sleeves and just do what's needed, and I don't know how long I can stand this.
Agile is a fad. It will go away.
This is a comment to the cn tag I just put on the article.
HandsomeFella ( talk) 11:00, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
Reading over this article a few times, and this whole thing feels less like a plain explanation of a software development process and more along the lines of a cult recruitment manifesto.
Key issues: Too many words to explain nothing, Long run on paragraphs that aim to make the eyes glaze over. Should the entire manifesto be even printed within the article instead of just being left as an external link? An absurd amount of hideous buzzwords complimenting the look as a cult manifesto. The porthole portal of links in the middle of the article, spinning potential readers about into a traffic circle of useless information.
Trying to summarize for a more concise article: Agile is a hope & pray type philosophy towards development schemed up by people who don't know software development. It relies on being a constantly moving target with irresponsibly short goals, and overrelies on kissing the butt of a potential customer by overcommunicating with them daily. If left to their own devices, Agile developers would skip many of the standards and testing required of them by ISO and other such associations. Documentation is considered a devil of the details and other people should document the code made in 24 hours on a 7 hour coffee bender. 2601:540:C700:42DF:76C8:5F43:53F1:5C95 ( talk) 06:49, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
The table titled "Home grounds of different development methods" starts off being tabular, with each row seeming to address one feature of the development environment—criticality, developer experience, etc. But at the fourth row it goes off the rails, with the first two columns addressing the number of developers and the third column mentioning (again) requirements. The fifth row mentions culture in the first two columns and "Extreme quality" in the third.
Essentially it would seem impossible to add row labels to the table because it is unclear how one would label rows 4 and 5.
Perhaps it could be expanded with some blank cells so the nonsequitor entries in column 3 be in their own rows. 38.23.161.163 ( talk) 21:48, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
The paragraphs titled "Behavior-driven development", "Continuous integration", and "Cross-functional team" all contain the same text, which is a copy of the "Agile Testing" paragraph. 38.23.161.163 ( talk) 22:08, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
Every project schedule created in MS Project or any other tool has the shape of a waterfall, so every project is a Waterfall. Only the production process can be agile. Konsul28 ( talk) 09:03, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
https://www.academia.edu/118622542/The_twilight_of_AGILE_propaganda_Why_AGILE_is_not_a_Project_Management_Methodology_ Konsul28 ( talk) 09:14, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Agile software development article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives:
1,
2,
3Auto-archiving period: 180 days
![]() |
![]() | Radiator (information) was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 09 August 2012 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Agile software development. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The content of this article has been derived in whole or part from
http://jaftalks.com/. Permission has been received from the copyright holder to release this material under both the
Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported license and the
GNU Free Documentation License. You may use either or both licenses. Evidence of this has been confirmed and stored by
VRT volunteers, under ticket number
2010051210011893. Note: Permission has been granted to incorporate content from this website under these licenses, but contributors to the article may determine through
consensus whether content so incorporated is appropriate for inclusion. This template is used by approved volunteers dealing with the Wikimedia volunteer response team system (VRTS) after receipt of a clear statement of permission at permissions-en ![]() |
Old fart here. I have spent 42 years in the mainframe industry, both as an all-round business analyst, database designer and developer and (last 10 years) database administrator. I retired in September, but found retirement a bit dull, so I have started up as a consultant. And now I have found that literally every company is going Agile. We're doing "standups" every morning, we have sprint planning sessions every two weeks, we have refinement sessions, we have PI's (program increments) consisting of 5 two-week sprints, and every PI – i.e. every 10 weeks – there is a two-day planning session with the whole IT department, 40–45 people. So, they are basically burning money, at least in my view; having 40–45 people in a two-day planning session consumes as many manhours as one person can do in about four months.
And now that I read about Agile, it says that the Waterfall model was criticized for "micromanaging". Eyeroll. I guess it could be, but that depends on the project leader. Agile appears to be micromanaging by design.
I'm an impatient person and I'm used to rolling up my sleeves and just do what's needed, and I don't know how long I can stand this.
Agile is a fad. It will go away.
This is a comment to the cn tag I just put on the article.
HandsomeFella ( talk) 11:00, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
Reading over this article a few times, and this whole thing feels less like a plain explanation of a software development process and more along the lines of a cult recruitment manifesto.
Key issues: Too many words to explain nothing, Long run on paragraphs that aim to make the eyes glaze over. Should the entire manifesto be even printed within the article instead of just being left as an external link? An absurd amount of hideous buzzwords complimenting the look as a cult manifesto. The porthole portal of links in the middle of the article, spinning potential readers about into a traffic circle of useless information.
Trying to summarize for a more concise article: Agile is a hope & pray type philosophy towards development schemed up by people who don't know software development. It relies on being a constantly moving target with irresponsibly short goals, and overrelies on kissing the butt of a potential customer by overcommunicating with them daily. If left to their own devices, Agile developers would skip many of the standards and testing required of them by ISO and other such associations. Documentation is considered a devil of the details and other people should document the code made in 24 hours on a 7 hour coffee bender. 2601:540:C700:42DF:76C8:5F43:53F1:5C95 ( talk) 06:49, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
The table titled "Home grounds of different development methods" starts off being tabular, with each row seeming to address one feature of the development environment—criticality, developer experience, etc. But at the fourth row it goes off the rails, with the first two columns addressing the number of developers and the third column mentioning (again) requirements. The fifth row mentions culture in the first two columns and "Extreme quality" in the third.
Essentially it would seem impossible to add row labels to the table because it is unclear how one would label rows 4 and 5.
Perhaps it could be expanded with some blank cells so the nonsequitor entries in column 3 be in their own rows. 38.23.161.163 ( talk) 21:48, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
The paragraphs titled "Behavior-driven development", "Continuous integration", and "Cross-functional team" all contain the same text, which is a copy of the "Agile Testing" paragraph. 38.23.161.163 ( talk) 22:08, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
Every project schedule created in MS Project or any other tool has the shape of a waterfall, so every project is a Waterfall. Only the production process can be agile. Konsul28 ( talk) 09:03, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
https://www.academia.edu/118622542/The_twilight_of_AGILE_propaganda_Why_AGILE_is_not_a_Project_Management_Methodology_ Konsul28 ( talk) 09:14, 7 May 2024 (UTC)