Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Manifesto for Async Software Development

asyncmanifesto.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 62 posts

Re: Manifesto for Async Software Development

#51

Post by [deleted] »

qznc wrote: post #35
programminggeek wrote: post #15

This misses on the most important part of agile/scrum/lean... retrospectives. To understand lean, you have to understand its roots in operations management and lean production methods at Toyota and other companies. The whole purpose is not predictable planning, it's continuous process improvement. It's the process of improving your process. If you were doing agile or async right, you would start with a process or man…

So here is my Manifesto of Eventually Awesome Development of Anything: 1. Write down a process (Waterfall, Agile, Cowboy, whatever) 2. Regularly reconsider and improve the process

[deleted]

Re: Manifesto for Async Software Development

#52

Post by dragonwriter »

qznc wrote: post #35
programminggeek wrote: post #15

This misses on the most important part of agile/scrum/lean... retrospectives. To understand lean, you have to understand its roots in operations management and lean production methods at Toyota and other companies. The whole purpose is not predictable planning, it's continuous process improvement. It's the process of improving your process. If you were doing agile or async right, you would start with a process or man…

So here is my Manifesto of Eventually Awesome Development of Anything: 1. Write down a process (Waterfall, Agile, Cowboy, whatever) 2. Regularly reconsider and improve the process

Agile isn't a process (the popularity of Scrum and its incorrect description as if it was equivalent to Agile confuses this.) Agile is basically what you describe, (Lean is more explicitly so.)

Re: Manifesto for Async Software Development

#53

Post by programminggeek »

qznc wrote: post #35
programminggeek wrote: post #15

This misses on the most important part of agile/scrum/lean... retrospectives. To understand lean, you have to understand its roots in operations management and lean production methods at Toyota and other companies. The whole purpose is not predictable planning, it's continuous process improvement. It's the process of improving your process. If you were doing agile or async right, you would start with a process or man…

So here is my Manifesto of Eventually Awesome Development of Anything: 1. Write down a process (Waterfall, Agile, Cowboy, whatever) 2. Regularly reconsider and improve the process

That's exactly right. The only thing you ever know for sure is you can always improve the process.

Re: Manifesto for Async Software Development

#54

Post by philbarr »

philbarr wrote: post #45

I think the main point here is: Agile Manifesto - put together after lots of thought and signed by acclaimed industry professionals. Async Manifesto - someone's opinion on a website.

I do wish people would reply with a decent criticism of my comment sometimes rather than simply downvote. I personally thought my comment was valid - it's not really a manifesto in the spirit of the Agile Manifesto if it's not agreed upon by lots of people, right?

Disagree? Then please say why...

Re: Manifesto for Async Software Development

#55

Post by kethinov »

philbarr wrote: post #54
philbarr wrote: post #45

I think the main point here is: Agile Manifesto - put together after lots of thought and signed by acclaimed industry professionals. Async Manifesto - someone's opinion on a website.

I do wish people would reply with a decent criticism of my comment sometimes rather than simply downvote. I personally thought my comment was valid - it's not really a manifesto in the spirit of the Agile Manifesto if it's not agreed upon by lots of people, right? Disagree? Then please say why...

Because you attacked the author, not the argument.

Re: Manifesto for Async Software Development

#56

Post by dragonwriter »

kethinov wrote: post #22
programminggeek wrote: post #15

This misses on the most important part of agile/scrum/lean... retrospectives. To understand lean, you have to understand its roots in operations management and lean production methods at Toyota and other companies. The whole purpose is not predictable planning, it's continuous process improvement. It's the process of improving your process. If you were doing agile or async right, you would start with a process or man…

It seems the opposite to me. There's nothing stopping you from continually improving processes under the async model. On the other hand, Scrum retrospectives are token at best because they assume the premises of Scrum. You can't adopt any reforms unless those reforms fit into the narrowly-tailored practices of Scrum. As such, any reforms that involve replacing the daily standup meeting, the sprint planning meeting, o…

> As such, any reforms that involve replacing the daily standup meeting, the sprint planning meeting, or changing anything about how Scrum works at all are not open to discussion. How is that "Agile?"

Its not. Scrum is a collection of practices (many of which may have been developed through an Agile-like attitude wherever they originated) dictated, adopted, packaged, and sold as exactly the kind of processes-over-people-and-interactions manner against which the Agile Manifesto is a reaction.

Almost all of the individual practices of Scrum are good ideas to consider (whether or not they should be applied is organization-specific) in Agile/Lean organizations, but Scrum, qua Scrum, is not Agile.

Re: Manifesto for Async Software Development

#57

Post by lugg »

partomniscient wrote: post #39
lugg wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure it was a troll? and not just reference to the design style parody of the original? (ie the 1990s design)

They haven't publicly put names to it and the domain is WhoisGuard Protected, so I guess so? Either that, or their trolling level is so artful they're even self-decepting.

I noticed lacking names, and the whois. My first guess was guerilla marketing by gitlab.

Re: Manifesto for Async Software Development

#58

Post by philbarr »

kethinov wrote: post #55
philbarr wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do wish people would reply with a decent criticism of my comment sometimes rather than simply downvote. I personally thought my comment was valid - it's not really a manifesto in the spirit of the Agile Manifesto if it's not agreed upon by lots of people, right? Disagree? Then please say why...

Because you attacked the author, not the argument.

No I didn't. I attacked the premise. Someone is attempting to piggyback the agile manifesto to express their own personal opinion.

That opinion may or may not be valid, and is up for debate, but my point is that you can't just put up a website with your opinion on and say it's the "new" agile manifesto.

The rest of the discussion on here is about whether those opinions are correct - I was addressing the fact that the real, original, agile manifesto wasn't just "some bloke's opinion", it was the opinions of well known thought leaders that had distilled their experience and knowledge into an easily understood manifesto.

Re: Manifesto for Async Software Development

#59

Post by kethinov »

philbarr wrote: post #58
kethinov wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because you attacked the author, not the argument.

No I didn't. I attacked the premise. Someone is attempting to piggyback the agile manifesto to express their own personal opinion. That opinion may or may not be valid, and is up for debate, but my point is that you can't just put up a website with your opinion on and say it's the "new" agile manifesto. The rest of the discussion on here is about whether those opinions are correct - I was addressing the fact that the…

Attacking the credibility of the author doesn't address the merits of the argument. It's an ad hominem attack.

Re: Manifesto for Async Software Development

#60

Post by philbarr »

kethinov wrote: post #59
philbarr wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No I didn't. I attacked the premise. Someone is attempting to piggyback the agile manifesto to express their own personal opinion. That opinion may or may not be valid, and is up for debate, but my point is that you can't just put up a website with your opinion on and say it's the "new" agile manifesto. The rest of the discussion on here is about whether those opinions are correct - I was addressing the fact that the…

Attacking the credibility of the author doesn't address the merits of the argument. It's an ad hominem attack.

I thought HN had moved away from calling everything an "ad hominem" but anyway - no it's not. I feel that my point is directly relevant. The Async "Manifesto" is just one person's opinion, it's not a group of thought leader's opinions. There's a huge and relevant difference.

If he had called it, "my proposed new async manifesto" or something that would have been fine.

Post reply on HN