|Just another Perl shrine|
Re: An interesting rebuttal of "agile"by BrowserUk (Pope)
|on Mar 16, 2008 at 18:07 UTC||Need Help??|
Sounds to me like an(other) example of the "Process That Would Be King"--and did. Agility is about being able to move and change course when the need arises, not dancing around on the spot waving your arms in the air like a Kung Fu movie wannabe.
Agility in software development (prototyping and RAD as well as TDD & Agile methods), like a Kung Fu adept, is about economy of motion, not motion for its own sake. Set-in-stone, everything pre-planned methodologies can change direction, it just costs a lot. Time and (therefore) money. Being agile is about being able to recognise the need for a change of direction early, and so minimising the effects of the enevitable need for change. And again, like the Kung Fu adept, it's as much about antisipating the need for change as it is about reacting to it.
Anything can be done badly, and allowing the process to become king is symptomiatic of that. As with all requirements, the need should precede the ability. If any organisation has reached the need to release daily, it's not just a lack of process control, but a process that is out of control.
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.