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

Agile at 20: The Failed Rebellion

simplethread.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 320 posts

Re: Agile at 20: The Failed Rebellion

#291

Post by ratww »

avereveard wrote: post #213
ratww wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm all for shitting on the JS ecosystem, but honestly there haven't been any noticeable shifts whatsoever in its ecosystem for at least 6 or 7 years now. Both React and Vue.js are now older than jQuery was when both were released. Same for Babel and Webpack. Typescript is older than all of these. SASS/SCSS also older than Typescript. Those are the only things you see in 99% of the frontend job descriptions out there…

They keep releasing versions that break backward compatibility forcing whole app rewrite left and right, that counts too

The track record for compatibility in the tools I mentioned is extremely good. Even when new approaches were launched (Hooks, Composition in Vue), backwards compatibility was kept. You can even mix and match approaches in the same app. Of course there's Angular, but that's the exception to the rule.

Heck, Microsoft has completely changed the way of writing native Windows apps in the last 10 years more ways than Javascript frameworks have introduced new stuff. Apple even changed the language to one that (unlike Typescript) is not backwards compatible. Complaining about the JS ecosystem evolving too fast is anachronistic, that happened more than 8 years ago.

Re: Agile at 20: The Failed Rebellion

#292

Post by AH4oFVbPT4f8 »

stunt wrote: post #166

I avoid working at companies that 1) use SAFe, or 2) assign dedicated Scrum Master for dev teams, or 3) use crappy project management tools. To me that's an indicator that decision makers in those companies have no understanding about software development.

what are the non-crappy project management tools youve used ?

Re: Agile at 20: The Failed Rebellion

#293

Post by rramadass »

pydry wrote: post #192
dirkt wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The fundamental problem with Agile This is not what the article is about. If you look at the Agile Manifesto, it says e.g. - Individuals and interactions over processes and tools - Responding to change over following a plan What you get in quite a few big companies following "Agile" with the air quotes is the opposite: - Processes and tools over individuals and interactions - Following (and making) a plan over resp…

The agile manifesto was the problem. It's a vague as hell set of proscriptions that everybody could project their own ideas on to that got turned into a pseudo-religion. I once had it used against me to justify not writing tests ("processes and tools!"). We had meetings about bugs instead. Seriously. Complain all you like about perversion, that was a perfectly valid interpretation coz those hallowed commandments are,…

>The agile manifesto was the problem. It's a vague as hell set of proscriptions that everybody could project their own ideas on to that got turned into a pseudo-religion.

thank you, Thank You, THANK YOU!

It is a useless set of vague platitudes which offered nothing but a sense of seeming aphoristic depth. How so many people fell for it is still a mystery to me. Instead of focusing on the core problem of Requirements gathering and Software Specification, well known trial-and-error approaches were dressed up as something profound and a whole industry was created out of thin air. People seem to have forgotten the works of Fred Brooks/Barry Boehm and that their iterative "Spiral Model" IS Agile. There is nothing new i could find in the "modern" Agile/Scrum movement except mindless emphasis on Processes/Tools which is insanity, eg; The position of "Scrum Master" is the very definition of a "Bullshit Job" and should be abolished forthwith.

Re: Agile at 20: The Failed Rebellion

#294

Post by rramadass »

lrdswrk00 wrote: post #238
pydry wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The agile manifesto was the problem. It's a vague as hell set of proscriptions that everybody could project their own ideas on to that got turned into a pseudo-religion. I once had it used against me to justify not writing tests ("processes and tools!"). We had meetings about bugs instead. Seriously. Complain all you like about perversion, that was a perfectly valid interpretation coz those hallowed commandments are,…

They’re purposely ill defined. The outputs they seek are emergent. You also belittle scrum for becoming too specific. Seems you’re still processing what to make of any of it. Knowledge work is immaterial and should have no prescribed rails or all you get is run of the mill outputs. It’s similar to business; billions have been spent investigating what technology or management style brought the biggest gains. The math…

To apply one of my favourite phrases to your post;

"What ineffable twaddle" !

I highly recommend to you the works of David Parnas, Barry Boehm, Fred Brooks, Gerald Weinberg for edification.

Start with the paper; "A Rational Design Process: How and Why to Fake It."

Re: Agile at 20: The Failed Rebellion

#295

Post by rramadass »

pydry wrote: post #275
3grdlurker wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> aren't as appropriate when you're doing engineering Yeah but that's not the point that I'm making, is it? What I'm saying is that people project their own meanings into language all the time regardless of whether the language is being used in deeply personal interactions or in professional settings; therefore you can't just fault the Agile manifesto for its supposed "ambiguity". On the point re: how laws and contra…

>Yeah but that's not the point that I'm making, is it? What I'm saying is that people project their own meanings into language all the time That was MY point. >therefore you can't just fault the Agile manifesto for its supposed "ambiguity". You absolutely can. They didn't have to write it in an obtuse, ambiguous and metaphorical way that practically required people to project their own meaning. They deliberately chos…

>It's a sliding scale. Flirting and poetry is way over on the far left with the agile manifesto. Scrum is further to the right. Legalese is further still to the right. Math further still. It's fairly self-evident that the level of specificity required in the language used varies depending on the task. Being too specific when you flirt is common sitcom grist and nobody's ever made poetry out of a shopping list.

Beautifully said, you have a way with words!

Re: Agile at 20: The Failed Rebellion

#296

Post by rramadass »

pydry wrote: post #246
lrdswrk00 wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They’re purposely ill defined. The outputs they seek are emergent. You also belittle scrum for becoming too specific. Seems you’re still processing what to make of any of it. Knowledge work is immaterial and should have no prescribed rails or all you get is run of the mill outputs. It’s similar to business; billions have been spent investigating what technology or management style brought the biggest gains. The math…

>They’re purposely ill defined. Yes they were. The cynical side of me says that this was because they were purposefully trying to create a rallying cry or something akin to a religion to better sell their wares and were unconcerned about the fallout that would ensue. The less cynical side of me says they did it because they came up with "extreme programming" and knew that a lot of it was kind of bullshit, disagreed w…

>this was because they were purposefully trying to create a rallying cry or something akin to a religion to better sell their wares

> they came up with "extreme programming" and knew that a lot of it was kind of bullshit, disagreed with each other on the details

Money quotes!

I had attended a presentation by Kent Beck on "eXtreme Programming" well before the Agile/Scrum movement started and came away with the exact sentiments listed above.

Re: Agile at 20: The Failed Rebellion

#297

Post by rramadass »

3grdlurker wrote: post #280
pydry wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Yeah but that's not the point that I'm making, is it? What I'm saying is that people project their own meanings into language all the time That was MY point. >therefore you can't just fault the Agile manifesto for its supposed "ambiguity". You absolutely can. They didn't have to write it in an obtuse, ambiguous and metaphorical way that practically required people to project their own meaning. They deliberately chos…

I think that you fundamentally misunderstand the purpose of the Agile manifesto. It’s not meant to be an algorithm or a highly specific set of instructions—it’s really just a collection of values that are meant to be the foundations of specific Agile frameworks, like Scrum. If you have trouble understanding that, then you must have trouble understanding the difference between Mission-Vision statements and KPIs.

I see exact parallels between the Agile Manifesto and Agile Movement same as the Golden Plates of Moroni and Mormon Church.

Re: Agile at 20: The Failed Rebellion

#298

Post by eesmith »

mytailorisrich wrote: post #287
eesmith wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does "standard" mean to you? From what I can tell, that assertion is common in Agile advocacy. But from my experience as a professional software developer in the 1990s, and from reading stories about software development, waterfall was not used at Apple, Be, Commodore, Data General, Infocom, Microsoft, VisiCorp, and more. That's not to say no one used a (modified) waterfall model. Simply that I haven't found evi…

I put 'standard' in quotes and meant that it (and its derivatives) was widespread. I'm sure not all companies used it, perhaps it also varied by domain. My experience is that it was indeed common, and still somewhat is. I read at my first job 20 years ago we had to take a training on the V model, which is derived from the waterfall model. It has also always been common in my experience to write plenty of detailed spe…

I can agree with "standard in [domain]", as there are many domains know nothing about.

What raises my hackles is the lack of any qualifiers, given how rarely it's used in the projects I know about.

Re: Agile at 20: The Failed Rebellion

#299

Post by pjmlp »

brtkdotse wrote: post #142
Ma8ee wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve seen countless systems built where technology choices where more exciting than economical. Why build something in c# on top of SQL-server in six months when it can be done in three years with micro services, Kotlin, Cassandra, Kafka, mongoDb etc…

For real. That why I’ve focused my consulting on pure Microsoft stack at insurance companies. My knowledge _acumulates_ for each assignment, rather than having to start over with the tech du jour.

Java, .NET and C++ over here.

Get to rewrite the micro services, Kotlin, Cassandra, Kafka, mongoDb hardly documented, back into C# on top of SQL Server when the teams have left for the new jobs after haved pimped up their CV.

Re: Agile at 20: The Failed Rebellion

#300

Post by outsomnia »

smokey_circles wrote: post #127
outsomnia wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know why it's "easy" to blame "management"? Because they often don't understand the technology question or even what the issue is, but insist to intercept every decision.

The air quotes sell it. It's easy to blame management because developers and engineers haven't the foggiest idea what management actually does. Instead of engaging with that problem, they retreat to themselves where they hiss the name management in dark corners. Fact is: Developers are incapable of self organising, and would drown overnight without management's stiff hand. I absolutely hate how accurate that is becau…

> Fact is: Developers are incapable of self organising, and would drown overnight without management's stiff hand.

Heard of Linux?

Post reply on HN