<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>The Lylo Files &#187; agile</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.lylo.co.uk/category/agile/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.lylo.co.uk</link>
	<description>Not very much at all, really</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Mar 2010 22:56:02 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Agile Google?</title>
		<link>http://blog.lylo.co.uk/2006/01/23/agile-google/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.lylo.co.uk/2006/01/23/agile-google/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Jan 2006 13:00:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Olly</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[agile]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[software]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lylo.co.uk/blog/2006/01/23/agile-google/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Other than reading this post about code-sharing and 20% time, I know little about Google&#8217;s internal software development practices. Do they have epic gant charts constructed from 40 sheets of A3 and sellotape covering an entire office wall? Do the engineers have to email their project manager every week (or, worse, every day) with half-day [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Other than reading <a href="http://www.eightypercent.net/Archive/2005/03/24.html#a235">this post</a> about code-sharing and <a href="http://www.google.com/support/jobs/bin/static.py?page=about.html">20% time</a>, I know little about <a href="http://www.google.co.uk">Google</a>&#8217;s internal software development practices. Do they have epic gant charts constructed from 40 sheets of A3 and sellotape covering an entire office wall? Do the engineers have to email their project manager every week (or, worse, every day) with half-day granularity time estimates and a progress report detailing their latest achievements? Somehow I don&#8217;t think so.</p>
<p>Google appear to follow the <em>release early, release often</em> mantra of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agile_software_development">agile software development</a>. They release products early with a &#8216;beta&#8217; tag and reduced functionality, then release updates containing new features at frequent (although not regular) intervals. <a title="Google Mail" href="http://mail.google.com">Gmail</a> is a perfect example of this. Even though Yahoo have also started to roll out <a href="http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-9236_7-6332685.html">the beta</a> of their Gmail-rivalling web mail system, you get the impression that their development is somewhat less agile than Google. More Microsoft than Thoughtworks, more donkey than race horse.</p>
<p>Rather than working in agile utopia, it&#8217;s probable that Google operate a much more formal, regimented system which combines aspects of several methodologies. They probably have significant requirements specifications, design documents and their <abbr title="User Acceptanace Testing">UAT</abbr> phase will be long and scrutinous (although this would be the case irrespective of development methodology), but the <strong>simplicity</strong> of their products, their <strong>productivity</strong> and <strong>the way they listen to customer feedback</strong> is a clear sign of a belief in the <a href="http://www.agilemanifesto.org/principles.html">underlying principles</a> of the agile manifesto.</p>
<p>Any Googleites out there want to share their experiences?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.lylo.co.uk/2006/01/23/agile-google/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Spectacular vernacular</title>
		<link>http://blog.lylo.co.uk/2005/11/16/spectacular-vernacular/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.lylo.co.uk/2005/11/16/spectacular-vernacular/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Nov 2005 09:49:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Olly</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[agile]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[holistic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[project management]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lylo.co.uk/blog/?p=7</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It&#8217;s fairly well known within software circles that, generally speaking, true agile software development is not so much frowned upon by project managers, but rather wholly dismissed as a software engineering flight of fancy.  Quite clearly, pair programming = a 100% waste of resources.  Obvious isn&#8217;t it?  Thus, despite advances in software [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s fairly well known within software circles that, generally speaking, true <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agile_software_development">agile software development</a> is not so much frowned upon by project managers, but rather wholly dismissed as a software engineering flight of fancy.  Quite clearly, pair programming = a 100% waste of resources.  Obvious isn&#8217;t it?  Thus, despite advances in software methodologies, traditional <a href="http://xp.c2.com/BigDesignUpFront.html">BDUF</a> and the <a href="http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?WaterFall">Waterfall Model</a> which have been used (and their problems regularly experienced) since the software stone age, still rule.  I think we&#8217;re still in the stone age.</p>
<p>Over the last year I&#8217;ve noticed that agile terminology is beginning to decorate middle management vernacular, despite agile methodology still not being accepted, or even considered, as a feasible development approach in most software teams.  Having exhausted such popular words<sup>[1]</sup> as <em>synergy</em>, <em>holistic</em>, <em>strategic</em> and <em>collaborative</em>, middle managers have eagerly embraced <em>unit test</em>, <em>iterative</em> and <em>refactor</em> without having concerned themselves about their actual meaning.  I&#8217;m sure they mean well, but <em>refactor</em> is commonly used alongside or in place of <em>re-write</em>, <em>iterative</em> is randomly thrown in to conversations whilst <em>unit test</em> is, well, just <em>abused</em> (&#8221;the inbound process can now be completed and unit tested&#8221;).</p>
<p>This &#8220;term-abuse&#8221; is actually rather amusing and can save your sanity during a tedious meeting, but I think it&#8217;s a software developer&#8217;s duty to correct a manager guilty of it, or at least <em>try</em> to correct them, and continue to do so until the penny drops (or until you get &#8216;promoted&#8217; to project manager).</p>
<p>I know it&#8217;s only a matter of time before I&#8217;m asked, &#8220;how&#8217;s your continuous integration coming along?&#8221;, but at least I&#8217;ll be able to reply with, &#8220;it&#8217;s achieving remarkable synergy with the strategic holistic approach&#8221; without fear of sounding ridiculous.</p>
<p><a name="fn1"></a><br />
[1] <span style="font-size: 90%; font-family: 'lucida grande','lucida sans unicode',helvetica,tahoma,verdana,arial,sans-serif">The most hilarious management-speak I&#8217;ve heard lately, said in all seriousness to a room of over thirty people, was the frankly nonsense-embracing, &#8220;we want to be holistic about our scalable/repeatable logic&#8221;.  Reader explanations are encouraged.</span></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.lylo.co.uk/2005/11/16/spectacular-vernacular/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
