Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Do Agile 'Sprints' Benefit Software Developers?

news.ycombinator.com

11–20 of 121 posts

Re: Ask HN: Do Agile 'Sprints' Benefit Software Developers?

#11
"2. Early value delivery. But we're in the era of CI/CD, where deployments can happen multiple times a day. Are sprint deadlines just relics of a time when physical software delivery was necessary?"

The fact that deployments happen multiple times a day is not exclusive of the fact that multiple deployments can fit inside one sprint.

I'm not a fan of Agile. But I don't mind the idea of "Let's define things we can get done in the next 2 weeks. And see what we can get done by the 2 week deadline, then reflect on it."

I think there needs to be a defined timeframe (of estimated time-boxed phases or whatever you want to call them), in order to reflect and measure outcomes.

In life, in some cases, meeting a requirement by a specific deadline is extremely important because the consequences are potentially very expensive.

For example, if you're organizing an in-person event of dozens, hundreds, or thousands of people. Clearly, your team must have produced the promised outcome by the deadline, resulting in as perfectly smooth an outcome as possible. Otherwise there is massive chaos, embarrassment, financial expense, and even legal consequences. The same consequences are present in even small & medium sized professional software companies.

Whereas, in software, if you're on a less important Proof of Concept consulting project... it might be OK to deliver 2 or even 4 weeks late-- there can be more flexibility, due to various factors.

The time period's name, its amount of time, its amount of work achieved... that's all fungible and flexible.

But to say "I got these 3 things done" vs. "...in 1 year" vs "...in 3 months" ...these are important details in the context of most peoples' work-- because time is a resource and a metric.

I really don't mind sprints. What I dislike is:

- Daily Standups that occur more than 3 days a week and last longer than 10 minutes. It's nice to see everyone occasionally. Forcing me to is a pain. For those other 2 days, I'd rather silently sit in on the Managers, Directors, and Architects' Daily standup (That said, if it's not genuine it could turn into a staged performance for the peons).

- Managers without Software Engineering experience leading standups

- Non-engineers not being required to give their Daily Standup report. Team Managers, Project Managers, others -- If I have to give a report, you should have to give a report as well. We should all feel the same pressure to be on point.

Re: Ask HN: Do Agile 'Sprints' Benefit Software Developers?

#12
Hello it's me a software developer. In my experience sprints can be beneficial when managing executives- they understand only so much can fit into 2 or 3 weeks, when you get into months the temptation is too great to keep adding tasks. I also find it useful to avoid the developer temptation to do major all at once re-writes that involve a total changeover deployment day. Instead force developers to pick off smaller parts that can go live (and thus actually get used) sooner. Similarly, sprints challenge developers to think of what they can get done and show to stakeholders quickly and get feedback. All that being said if the executives want to operate on totally fixed deadlines and ever expanding must haves for phase 1, sprints will not save you.

Re: Ask HN: Do Agile 'Sprints' Benefit Software Developers?

#13
> Do sprints benefit developers?

No, "agile sprints" are meant for pacing developers.

  - Issue tracking helps developers keep track
  - Kanban helps developers keep focus
  - Planning two weeks ahead helps developers keep priority
There is something fundamentally unhealthy about sprinting for 2 weeks, again and again.

When "agile sprints" work well, they're either ultra-marathons (an acquired taste) or jogs.

Re: Ask HN: Do Agile 'Sprints' Benefit Software Developers?

#14
CI/CD only helps release often if you're only producing one component. If you're changing multiple different components then you need to sync them all up so that they're all releasable at the same time. A sprint gives you a deadline for everything being releasable again.

WIP limits are great until you're waiting for more information from a supplier on one ticket, feedback from a customer on another, and help from an expert from another team on a third ticket, so you sigh and pick up a fourth ticket so you're getting something done.

Artificial deadlines aren't great - but you can always extend a sprint if the team needs it. And preferably your tickets shouldn't be a whole sprint long anyway, you should be getting multiple small things done in that time.

Re: Ask HN: Do Agile 'Sprints' Benefit Software Developers?

#15
After over a decade of this, I'm convinced "agile" (scrum, really) was created to provide more jobs for product managers and create fluff roles like "agile coach." It may have more value for less experienced teams. More experienced developers will become frustrated by the ceremonial nonsense. I prefer the kanban style.

Re: Ask HN: Do Agile 'Sprints' Benefit Software Developers?

#16
Modern corporate Agile isn't the same as Agile Manifesto Agile. Even though they have basically the same name, don't mix the two up.

Sprints are one tool in your toolbox. Use them when it makes sense to do so.

I view them as most helpful around scope limiting. The goal is working software of some sort by the end of the sprint. That requires you to think about the problem at hand and how to break it apart such that you can achieve that goal inside the sprint. Some work doesn't require this boundary. Some work does.

Re: Ask HN: Do Agile 'Sprints' Benefit Software Developers?

#17
I think it's very useful to break work planning up into discrete stretches of time. This isn't something that was new with agile, either. It's long been a thing.

I think breaking work time up into finite stretches of time and having a reassessment in between them benefits everyone, including devs.

I think it's very easy to go overboard with the concept, and it's very easy for the concept to be abused, but that doesn't take away from its basic usefulness. I also don't like that they're called "sprints", but that's just a nomenclature issue.

Re: Ask HN: Do Agile 'Sprints' Benefit Software Developers?

#18
post #9

I like sprints because they're discrete. We agree to a certain bit of work that can get done in a certain period, and we do our best to complete it. It helps us to think about breaking up our tasks, and how tasks can be broken up. At the end of the sprint, we get to take a bit of a breath, and prepare for more upcoming work. Kanban style means that it's just a marathon. There's no time to stop and take a breath, ther…

The flipside of course is that they HAVE to be discrete. My issue with sprints is that they arbitrarily reduce the solution space - instead of asking "what's the right way to do this?", you ask "how much can we hack out in 2 weeks to show progress?". By putting a time/complexity limit on the work you choose to address, you are de facto ignoring any potentially high-impact work that doesn't fit into your sprint struct…

> My issue with sprints is that they arbitrarily reduce the solution space - instead of asking "what's the right way to do this?", you ask "how much can we hack out in 2 weeks to show progress?"

I think this is the most common way that the concept is abused, and it's very, very easy to fall into this trap. I suspect that it comes from an idea that the sprint length is sacrosanct so having tasks that go beyond a single sprint is to be avoided. Sprints should be a planning tool, not a hardcore thing.

Re: Ask HN: Do Agile 'Sprints' Benefit Software Developers?

#19
When I first started coding professionally, I thought sprints were stupid. We've got a backlog that will easily take us a year to complete. Why bother with organizing them into 2-week sections? Why not just finish a ticket, take the next one off the pile, and start working?

Over time, I learned that time-boxing your work creates short-term goals, a slight sense of urgency, and some accountability. Otherwise, it's easy to just look at the huge lists of tasks and think "Well, I'm expected to take a year to complete all these, and during that time, more work will be added to the pile, so I can just take my time" and become complacent.

That all said, sprint planning is impossible to get perfect, especially with an incompetent manager that fails to recognize patterns in point assignments. Consistent underestimations on the number of points the tasks are can look like people are underperforming. Consistent overestimations look like you have a team of rock stars.

Post reply on HN