Timeline for A backlog of "bite-size" tasks in parallel to the "main" feature backlog?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
19 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 11, 2013 at 22:32 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| Aug 11, 2013 at 23:19 | |||||
| May 29, 2013 at 14:29 | vote | accept | KeithS | ||
| May 16, 2013 at 5:37 | answer | added | user91175 | timeline score: 0 | |
| May 12, 2013 at 14:55 | audit | Reopen votes | |||
| May 13, 2013 at 21:14 | |||||
| May 11, 2013 at 23:06 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/StackProgrammer/status/333357557487898626 | ||
| May 9, 2013 at 14:45 | answer | added | Aaron Kurtzhals | timeline score: 3 | |
| May 9, 2013 at 13:33 | answer | added | TimG | timeline score: 3 | |
| May 9, 2013 at 13:06 | answer | added | Aleksandra | timeline score: 2 | |
| May 9, 2013 at 10:29 | answer | added | Avi | timeline score: 10 | |
| May 9, 2013 at 9:22 | answer | added | Brendan | timeline score: 2 | |
| May 9, 2013 at 4:20 | comment | added | KeithS | Oh, and lastly-lastly; the current system of requirements delivery is primarily these "drive-bys". If I happen to be elbows deep in a completely different codebase, and I don't write down what you want in enough detail to remember what you actually wanted when you came by my cube to ask me, it's just as likely to slip through the cracks entirely. Requirements gathering for larger projects is more organized, but there's always one more thing, and there isn't currently a central repository for these things. | |
| May 9, 2013 at 4:17 | history | edited | KeithS | CC BY-SA 3.0 | added 68 characters in body |
| May 9, 2013 at 4:15 | comment | added | KeithS | Lastly, there are some things that just can't be done by one guy, no matter how good. We want to be able to leverage our entire team in a coordinated way on big projects instead of waiting months for one guy to get all the LoC typed in on our NBT. That requires a system that allows that kind of coordination without going through our boss for everything. Up till now we haven't bothered, even to the point of hiring new people for the sole purpose of giving them something new to develop and own. | |
| May 9, 2013 at 4:11 | comment | added | KeithS | This system also largely prevents communication; we all each support the apps for which we're the ones still around who have done work with them, and we don't have time to learn what other people are doing. This has resulted in the adoption of different frameworks depending on what that coder's most familiar with, making interop between codebases a nightmare (and we live and die as a company on our skill in systems integration). | |
| May 9, 2013 at 4:08 | comment | added | KeithS | We have several problems with the current system; first, people that "own" the codebases of various in-house apps get buried by "drive-bys" requesting additional features. It's difficult or impossible to move on and focus on something else. That in turn basically makes each developer the "guru" for the code they have written, instead of each application being a team effort that every dev is at least somewhat familiar with. Not saying that any code ownership is bad, but strong code ownership, yeah we want to stop that. | |
| May 9, 2013 at 0:59 | comment | added | Robert Harvey | How well is the current cafeteria style of development working? If everyone is happy with it, and can live with the uncertainty of constantly-moving deadlines, then why adopt scrum at all? This is not merely a rhetorical question; the main reason you want to adopt scrum is to eliminate precisely that quality of your current development style that your stakeholders seem to value. You must be contemplating scrum because you perceive a problem that scrum will solve; has that problem been adequately and convincingly communicated to the stakeholders? | |
| May 8, 2013 at 22:24 | history | edited | KeithS | CC BY-SA 3.0 | added 9 characters in body |
| May 8, 2013 at 21:26 | history | edited | KeithS | CC BY-SA 3.0 | added 242 characters in body |
| May 8, 2013 at 21:20 | history | asked | KeithS | CC BY-SA 3.0 |