Hacker News new | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit login

All this Agile purism is great. I'm glad we're having the discussion, because that's how we can breed some understanding. The only problem with "pure" Agile is that it doesn't scale past 10 or so developers. If you're developing a sufficiently complex product, you need process. You need specs that can be distributed to other teams so they can build around the planned changes your team is making to its module.

This can be done in a pseudo-Agile way and coupled with a continuous integration process, which is what most companies call "Agile". Releases get cut every few sprints, so the product guys are happy. Developers hate it because all process that interferes with coding is bad, but it's still better than a traditional 6 month waterfall cycle.

It's not really Agile if you're being a purist, but it's a good compromise that keeps the business happy with the visibility they get while still releasing code on a relatively short cycle. There will always be process in any sufficiently large organization, since we all have different opinions on how to do things but we need to be on the same page.




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: