Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Pathologically Eclectic Rubbish Lister
 
PerlMonks  

Re^2: Some reflections on the Brainbench Perl Test

by BrowserUk (Patriarch)
on Dec 15, 2008 at 00:50 UTC ( [id://730328]=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re: Some reflections on the Brainbench Perl Test
in thread Some reflections on the Brainbench Perl Test

{Waving-fingers open-quote}Agility{Waving-fingers close-quote} is a myth. Just another meaningless statistics based, silver-bullet "paradigm".

And given 5 or 10 years, you'll realise that too.


Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Some reflections on the Brainbench Perl Test
by chromatic (Archbishop) on Dec 15, 2008 at 06:31 UTC
    Agility is a myth.

    In that case, how can anyone argue with such a well-defended and diligently researched assertion as that?

    Tuesday will be the 24th stable monthly release of Parrot in a row. We don't score 100% on that quiz, but I'm happy to compare our score now versus three years ago and put that up against your "evidence" any day.

      Tuesday will be the 24th stable monthly release of Parrot in a row.

      If your goal is releasing once a month, that is a fine record.

      Please note. I have absolutely no qualms in saying that you joining/leading the Parrot project not just made it better, but saved it.

      But I strongly suspect that a knowledgable, labels-shy observer with a good view of the project, and a good knowledge of you, would attribute the good and steady progress it has made since your involvement, down to your personality and drive and programming skills; not the currently trendy label, set of checklists or headline statistics for what at its crux, amounts to no more than having a well-thought through set of development procedures. And using them.

      Getting back to that quoted statistic. I'm too far away to know, but you might like to consider, how much time & effort (yours and others) is expended on a monthly basis producing those monthly releases--and keeping up with (downloading, exploring, familiarising, etc) them?

      And would the project be enhanced or diminished had 50% of that effort been expended on actual development, by having bi-monthly releases instead?


      Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
      "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
      In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.
        But I strongly suspect that a knowledgable, labels-shy observer with a good view of the project, and a good knowledge of you, would attribute the good and steady progress it has made since your involvement, down to your personality and drive and programming skills; not the currently trendy label, set of checklists or headline statistics for what at its crux, amounts to no more than having a well-thought through set of development procedures. And using them.

        I have trouble separating my "personality and drive and programming skills" from the "well-thought through set of development procedures" I use. If we committers can make and meet commitments regularly, perhaps we're doing something right. (Having a comprehensive test suite, reviewing patches, checking smoke tests, developing on branches and landing only when tests pass, and managing our bug queue are not Herculean tasks only supermen can perform.)

Re^3: Some reflections on the Brainbench Perl Test
by Your Mother (Archbishop) on Dec 15, 2008 at 01:09 UTC

    I don't pretend to disagree but after reading the evaluations questions at the link provided, I would *much* rather work somewhere that could score well on the assessment than not.

      Re-read those questions and adjust them (to remove the "agility paradigm" bias), for (your perception of) a well-run, tight-knit, mature development shop using any particular development methodology (set of established and proven working practices), and, if you can get them too waste their time answering those questions, they'll likely score highly.

      The primary goal of any development procedure: is having one.

      The (slightly) secondary goal: is using it.

      The tertiary (but still of Xtreme importance): is that methodology does not consume an overly substantial part of your budget, at the expense of your primary goal.

      When the process outwieghts the product, you are measuring the wrong statistics.

      There is no substitute for competent (not gifted or clever) programmers, who work hard, to achieve the primary goal.

      Experts in secondary goals seek only to emphasis their expertise, and maximise their value, even to the deteriment of that primary goal: achieving a working solution to the primary problem description.

      When the process become more important than than the goal--all is lost.


      Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
      "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
      In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.

        I used to write art reviews and I often made exactly the same point; one very unpopular in the art world: process is nonsense. Only the product, the art, matters. To some degree this becomes a context argument again. :)

        Software development is completely different. It's not one person creating a finished work. Keeping a software base together is itself process. I would never have quit my last job if even 1/3 of the practices in that assessment were in place (they weren't all process either). It was primarily the homegrown, ad hoc, à la carte, manager's choice process drove me out.

        Before you think I'm disagreeing with your major point I'll mention that I refused to be sent for Six Sigma Black Belt training a few of jobs back because, in the main, I agree with you; and strongly enough to cripple my own career. That was one of two choices that probably cost me a directorship or major program manager job at one of the Net's biggest animals.

        So I don't disagree with you. I think there's a huge difference between bureaucracy -- which is what I feel you are really critiquing -- and best practices -- which I found most of the assessment to encourage.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Domain Nodelet?
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://730328]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this?Last hourOther CB clients
Other Users?
Others romping around the Monastery: (2)
As of 2024-03-19 05:57 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    No recent polls found