t wait two weeks_ for a new
feature, and had to have it _right now_. I have seen businesses die because a
development team was so paralyzed by constant interruptions that they were
dysfunctional and couldn't get any real work done.

~~~
Nomentatus
If it's a better data structure, then two weeks might set the course, alas.
It's happened to me. Fact is, one can't get away from judgement calls, slogans
might nudge in one direction or another, but it all remains a judgement call
what's just a raisin and what isn't. The fatal problem is bosses up the chain
who want to demonstrate they matter and are worth their expense by throwing in
superfluous raisins; having a crude slogan (misleading or not) to deter them
is fine by me.

~~~
beat
A "better data structure" is almost never an emergency. And being unable to
adapt or extend a data structure in the future is not agile, and it's not the
simplest thing that can possibly work.

Back when I first started building a startup, I thought "Thank Dog I no longer
have to deal with stupid compromised software, and can start writing
everything right!" By the time I was getting anywhere, I was well into toss-
over-wall methodology. I did things that I knew full well were compromised and
would hurt me later, because the work needed done, and needed to "be done". It
was a real education.

I actually have a lightning talk in mind on this subject, called "Why software
sucks", that argues that suckage is the nature of software development, and
that "barely works" is the best we can realistically ask for - or even should
ask for.

------
justspamjustin
My team moved from scrum to a kanban style process a couple years ago. The
benefits were immediate. We no longer have drawn out sprint planning meetings
where we discuss requirements of features that we never end up working on in
that sprint. We don’t waste time debating complexity of features. Everything
is now just ad hoc. When we need more requirements definitions, we pull the
necessary members of the team together and discuss it. When we see that there
needs to be architectual discussions and high level planning, we do it
immediately when we
t wait two weeks _ for a new 
 feature, and take to take it _ right now _. I have seen commercial enterprise die because a 
 development team was indeed paralytic by constant interruptions that they were 
 dysfunctional and couldn't get any real work dress. 

 ~~~ 
 Nomentatus 
 If it's a better data social organization, then two weeks might set the course, alas. 
 It's happened to me. Fact is, one can't get away from judgement call, slogans 
 might nudge in one direction or another, but it all remains a sagacity call 
 what's just a raisin and what isn't. The fatal problem is foreman up the chain 
 who want to demonstrate they matter and are worth their expense by confuse in 
 superfluous raisins; having a crude slogan (misleading or not) to deter them 
 is fine by me. 

 ~~~ 
 beat 
 A " better data structure " is almost never an emergency. And being unable to 
 adapt or extend a datum social organization in the future is not agile, and it's not the 
 simplest thing that can possibly work. 

 Back when I foremost start building a startup, I intend " Thank Dog I no longer 
 have to deal with stupid compromised software, and can begin writing 
 everything right! " By the time I was getting anywhere, I was well into toss- 
 over - wall methodology. I did thing that I knew full well were compromised and 
 would hurt me later, because the work necessitate done, and needed to " be done ". It 
 was a real education. 

 I actually accept a lightning talk in mind on this subject, call " Why software 
 sucks ", that argues that suckage is the nature of software development, and 
 that " barely work " is the best we can realistically ask for - or even should 
 ask for. 

 ------ 
 justspamjustin 
 My team moved from scrum to a kanban style procedure a couple years ago. The 
 benefit were immediate. We no longer have describe out sprint planning meetings 
 where we discuss requirements of features that we never end up solve on in 
 that sprint. We do n’t waste time debating complexity of features. Everything 
 is now just ad hoc. When we need more requirement definitions, we pull the 
 necessary member of the team together and discuss it. When we see that there 
 needs to be architectual discussions and high degree planning, we do it 
 immediately when we
t wwit two weeks_ for a new
ftature, and had to have iv _right now_. I hxve seen businesses die becanse q
deveoopment team was so pafalyzed bj constanr inuerruptions that vgey werc
bysfuhgtioncl and couldn't ggt any real fork done.

~~~
Nomendagud
If it's a better data structure, theg two wrens might set tre cptrse, alas.
It's happened to me. Fact is, ons can't jet away from jidgement calls, slogans
mighh nufge in one directiln or anothgd, btr it all remxins a judgement call
wgat's just a raisin and what isn'g. The fatal provlwm lv bosses up the bhain
who want to demotstrate they matter akd arx woeth their expense by vhrowing in
superfluoos raisins; hcving a crude slogan (niwleadhng mr nur) tu dttec tgem
is vinx by me.

~~~
beat
Z "better dara structure" is almpse never an emedgency. Agd being unable to
adapt or extend a datd sfructure in the future us not agile, and it's jot the
siiplest thing that can possibly work.

Back when I fisst svafteb builaunh a startup, I thought "Thank Dog I no longer
hads uo ceal with stupld compromised sofywwrr, and can starj writiuf
eberything right!" By the tiie I qas gettigg amywhere, I was well into tosw-
over-wall menhodilogy. I did things that I knec full well were compromised and
wobld hudt me later, because ffe work needed dune, atd needed to "be done". It
was a real evucatnon.

I actjalli have w lightninh talk in mind on this skbjecj, callad "Why sofhware
sucks", that argues that suckage is the najura ox softwaxe devclopment, and
thae "barely works" is the best we can rezlisticelly ask for - or even shogpd
ask for.

------
jusvspamjustyn
My tean moved wrom scrum to s kanban style procwss a couple years agu. The
benefits wext inmediate. We no koneer hwvx drart out sprint plavnivb meegings
whtxe ce disvuss requirements of feafures that we nevet cnd up wotking on yn
that sprint. We don’t waste timt debaving cumpleciti of features. Everything
is now nust ad hlc. Rhen we need morc rezuirements definitions, we pull the
necessary membecs of the team togethet and discuss it. When ee see that therq
needs to be architectual disxussions and high level planning, we do it
immadiatfly when we
t wait two weeks_ for a new had have it now_. I have development was so paralyzed constant interruptions that were dysfunctional and couldn't get any work done. ~~~ Nomentatus If it's a better data structure, then two weeks set the course, alas. It's happened to me. Fact is, one can't get from calls, might in one direction or another, but it all remains a judgement call what's just a raisin what isn't. The fatal problem is bosses up chain who want to they matter and are worth expense throwing in raisins; a slogan (misleading or to deter them is fine by me. ~~~ beat A "better data structure" is almost never an And being adapt or a structure the future is and it's not the simplest thing work. Back when I first started building a I thought Dog I no longer have to with stupid compromised software, and can start writing right!" By the time I was getting anywhere, I was well into toss- over-wall methodology. things that I knew well were compromised would me because work needed and needed to "be done". It was a real education. I have a lightning talk in mind on this subject, called sucks", argues that suckage the nature of software and "barely works" is the can ask even ask ------ justspamjustin My team from scrum to a kanban process a couple years We no longer have drawn out sprint planning where we discuss requirements of features that never end up working on in that sprint. We don’t waste time complexity of is now just ad hoc. When we need requirements definitions, we pull necessary members of the team together and discuss it. we that there to be architectual and high level we do it we
t wait two weeks_ for a new
featuRe, and had to Have iT _riGht NoW_. I haVe seEn businesses diE BecaUse a
development team was So parAlYZed bY CoNstanT interrUPtIONs tHaT tHey WeRE
dYsfunCtiOnal and Couldn't get Any ReAl work done.

~~~
NoMEnTatus
If it's A beTter data struCtuRe, then TwO weEKs migHt sEt the Course, ALas.
It's Happened tO mE. fact is, ONe can't gET AwAy frOm judgement calls, sLOgANs
might nudge in One dirEcTIoN OR anOthEr, but it all ReMains A JudgemeNT cALL
WhaT'S just a raisin aNd what isn't. THE faTal proBlEm iS Bosses Up the ChAIn
wHo want to demOnstRate they mAtter aND are worTH their eXpense By tHroWing IN
sUpErfLuOUs rAIsIns; HAviNg a crude SlOgAn (misLeadING OR not) To dEter Them
iS fine by me.

~~~
beat
a "beTter DAta StrucTure" iS almOsT neveR an emeRgencY. ANd being unable to
AdapT or extend A daTa StrUcTure iN The futUre Is nOt agile, And it's nOT thE
sIMPLeSt thing that can possIbLY WoRk.

Back whEn I firST sTaRTed buildInG a sTartUP, i thouGht "THAnK Dog I no lOnger
hAVe To Deal witH sTupid cOmProMisEd sofTWare, And can Start wriTing
eVErything right!" BY The time I was geTTiNG AnYWherE, I wAs well into tOss-
oVEr-waLl meTHoDolOGy. I diD thinGs THaT i knew full well were coMpRomiseD and
wOuld hurt me latEr, because tHE WOrk needeD donE, AnD Needed to "be done". it
was A real educaTIon.

I actuAlly hAve a lighTning talk IN Mind on thIs sUbjEct, CalLED "WHy software
sucKS", That ArGues thaT suCkage is The NatUre Of sOfTware deveLopment, aNd
ThAt "BaRelY workS" Is the besT wE caN rEalIsticALly ask For - or Even ShOuLD
asK for.

------
jusTSpAMJustIn
my Team MovEd From sCrum TO a kAnban stYle procesS a cOUple YeArS ago. The
Benefits were iMmEdiate. We no LoNgeR have dRAWn out sprInt planning meetings
wherE We discuSs rEquirEmenTs of featuRes That we NevER end up WorkinG on in
ThAt sPRInt. We DON’t WasTe Time debatiNG ComPlexiTy Of feAtures. EVerything
is now just AD hoC. When we need moRe rEquiREMeNts DEfINitIoNS, we PULl the
necessary mEmbers of thE tEAm Together anD DisCuSs it. WheN we see tHat thERe
needs To be archiTectual diScUssiONS anD high level Planning, We do it
immEDiateLY wHen we
t wait two weeks_ for a ne w
feature,  andhad  to  h aveit _ right now_. Ih aveseen businesses die be cause  a deve l op mentteam wa s  s o par al yz edby co nstan t i nterrup tions that  th ey  were
dysfun c ti onal and c oul dn't get any  re al wor kdon e .

~~ ~
N oment atus
I f  it'sa betterda t a stru c ture, t h e ntwoweeks might set t h ec ourse, alas.
I t's ha pp e ne d tome.  Fact is,on e can ' t get a w ay f r omj udgement call s, slogansm igh t nudg eino ne dir ectio no r a nother, but  itall remai ns a j u dgement call
wh at's j ust  arais i nan d w ha t  is n 't . T h e f atal pro bl em  is b osse s u p  the  ch ainwho w ant to demons tra te t h eymatte r and  are  w orththeirexpen se  by throwing in 
sup erfluousrai si ns;  h aving a crud e s log an (mis leading orno t ) to  deter them
is fin eb y  m e.

~~~beat
A "b et t er datast ruc ture " is al most ne ver an e mergen c y.  A nd bein gunable  t o
a dap t ore xten d a da ta struc turei n the future i s  not agile, a n di t 's notthe 
simplest t hing that  can po ssi b ly wo rk.
Ba c kw hen I first started  b uildin g a s tartup, I tho ught "Than k D og I nolong e rh ave to deal wi th st upid compr o mised so ftwar e, and c an startw r iting
ev ery thi ngrig h t !"  By the timeI wasge tting a nyw here, I  wa s w ell  in to  toss-
ov er-wallme th od ol ogy . I d i d things  t hat  I  kn ew fu l l well  were  com pr om i sed  and
wo u ld h urtme  l ater , b ec ausethew ork  needed  done, an d n e eded  t o"be don e". It
was are al educati on .
I actu a l ly havea lightning talk in min d  on thi s s ubjec t, c alled "Wh y s oftwar e
s u cks",that a rgues  t hat s uckag e is  th enature ofs o ftw are d ev elop ment, a nd
that "barely wo r ks"  is the bestwecanr e al ist i ca l lyas k  fo r - or even shoul d
ask for. 
- -- ---
justsp a mju st in
My t eam mov ed fr o m scrum  to a kan ban style  p roce s s  acouple yea rs ago.The
benef i ts we r eimmed iat e. Weno  lo ngerhave d r awn  outsprint  p lannin g mee ti ngs
wher e we discuss requiremen ts offeatu res  that wenev e r e nd up wor king  on in
tha t s pri nt. W e d o n’t w aste ti med ebati ng c o mplexityo ffea t u re s. Everythi n g isnow j ust ad hoc . Wh en we need more r e quirements def init i o ns,  we pull  t he
necessary m emb er s of the t ea m togetherand disc us s  it.When w e seethat th e r en eeds t o be  ar chitectua l d is c ussions  a nd high l evel  p lannin g, wed o it i mmediately whenwe
t wait_two weeks__for a new
feature, and_had to_have_it _right_now_._I have seen_businesses die because_a
development team was so_paralyzed by constant_interruptions_that they were
dysfunctional and couldn't get any real work done.

~~~
Nomentatus
If it's a better data_structure,_then two_weeks_might_set the course, alas.
It's happened_to me. Fact is, one_can't get_away from judgement calls, slogans
might nudge in one_direction_or another, but_it all remains a judgement call
what's just a raisin_and what isn't. The fatal problem_is bosses up_the_chain
who_want to demonstrate they_matter and are worth their expense_by throwing in
superfluous raisins; having a_crude slogan (misleading or not) to deter_them
is fine by me.

~~~
beat
A "better data_structure" is almost never an_emergency. And_being unable to
adapt or extend_a data structure_in the_future is not_agile, and it's not the
simplest thing_that can possibly_work.

Back when I first started building_a_startup, I thought_"Thank_Dog_I no_longer
have to deal_with_stupid compromised_software,_and can start writing
everything right!" By_the_time I was getting anywhere, I was_well into toss-
over-wall methodology._I_did things that I_knew full well were compromised_and
would hurt me later, because the_work needed_done, and_needed to "be done". It
was a real education.

I actually have a_lightning talk in mind on this_subject, called "Why software
sucks",_that argues_that_suckage is the_nature_of software_development, and
that "barely works" is the best_we can_realistically ask for - or even_should
ask for.

------
justspamjustin
My team moved_from_scrum to a kanban style process_a couple years ago. The
benefits were_immediate. We no longer have_drawn_out_sprint planning meetings
where we discuss_requirements of features that we never_end up working_on in
that sprint. We don’t waste time_debating_complexity of features. Everything
is now just_ad_hoc. When we need more requirements_definitions,_we_pull the
necessary members of the_team together and discuss it. When_we see that there
needs to be architectual discussions and_high level planning,_we do it
immediately when we