Re: Practice: Slack

On Thursday, December 30, 2004, at 10:33:23 PM, Russell Gold wrote:

> On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 20:44:03 -0500, Ron Jeffries
> <ronjeffries-hPI1FfVg2TpDlFalPvvQyA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> This is somewhat stronger, it seems to me, than some people's
>> interpretation of the XP Planning Game. I've seen teams deliver
>> absolutely nothing in an iteration, and then want to have that be
>> OK: "Well, I guess our velocity was zero." I think this relates back
>> to Kent's comments on accountability: it's really not OK to commit
>> to something and deliver nothing.

> No, it's really not OK - but what if it happens? Presumably with a
> too-short iteration, it is possible that all of the tasks really did
> need more time than was available. So, scolding and recriminations
> aside,

Was someone recommending scolding and recriminations? I hope not.

> what DO you do in that case? Surely you cannot use "yesterday's
> weather" to predict that you will not accomplish anything in the next
> iteration, can you?

Why couldn't we predict that? What more likely prediction would seem
preferable? What would happen if we did predict that? How soon would
we be so far ahead of schedule that we'd ask for more work to do?

However, my point is that wise teams focus on meeting the sense of
the stories, even if the specific stories cannot all be
accomplished.

Ron Jeffries
www.XProgramming.com
I was smarter before I donated my brain to science.
I didn't know they meant NOW.




------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
$4.98 domain names from Yahoo!. Register anything.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/Q7_YsB/neXJAA/yQLSAA/nhFolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->