Agile

yo what do you guys think about agile?

Attached: Dg0HTMM.png (326x336, 17K)

I hate it.

Go fuck yourself, OP

Never heard of it but it looks like shit for dumbass startup people who write exclusively in languages that cross compile to JavaScript or Ruby

I hate it too, but I'm being forced to learn it to work in a certain company

You should post embarassing details about yourself to everybody in the company, and later kill yourself.

Fuck agile and fuck you.

Just like any other tool, it works in the right context. Especially key here is management understanding what it takes to write software.
>never heard of it
*never worked in the industry more like. Also, dont you care how retarded you look forming ad hoc opinions about shit you know nothing about then publicly spouting them when no one asked for your uniformed idiocy?

I show up and do my fucking job. Subscribing to some "methodology" is the same as joining a cult. No one cares about your special snowflake jobs in San Francisco.

Seriously, there's no reason to hate on agile *so long as the company culture is completely with it*.

Agile means delivering fast, not big design up front. It means short updates, not hour long status meetings. It means small and testable units of work, not clusterfucks.

There is literally nothing wrong with agile. What's wrong is when companies half-ass it.

The only thing I’ve liked about doing scrum is the daily meetings force people to communicate.

It's dogshit. Use the Team Software Process instead.

Attached: TSP.jpg (327x499, 31K)

aye, cheers

The fact that it was forced on me really doesn't make me feel happy about it, but I'm wondering if it actually has benefits or if it's just a California "new way of thinking" thing

same, and this is for a position in SF so spot on mate

makes sense, thanks man

Will look into that on the side, cheers mate

what makes it better than agile though?

Most companies who are all about agile just went into it because it was the latest buzzword at the time and they all implemented it poorly

Has Jow Forums worked and actually contributed to a product for a real-life customer? Agile is just an iterative process which is the basis of modern software and eventually leads to lean practices.

It means learn from your mistake, identify needs and stuff to improve and be able to deliver a product as early as possible and ideally at any point in time after to demo to customers, gather feedback and make adjustments that won't break everything since tests tell you what has been affected by changes.

Dou eet

What kind of job-meme-thing is best for an antisocial retard?

I want to not have to talk to people as much as possible, I want this

>do this please
>done
>nice, enjoy your weekend off, cya on monday
>will do boss
>repeat

Pretty much, yeah. I think agile came about in the 80s to help developers working in languages like C++ to better approach large programs in a modular fashion, and to be able to explain their process to business-types.

They tried to make us use it for a group project that is taking all semester at university but nobody actually implemented it. Meeting and planning and writing tests and meeting again takes so much time. Everybody just loosely divided the work between group members and got a final product that kinda works, in a third of the time.
I'm sure it works if you have a manager whose main job is going to do the planning and assign the tasks though.

And then what happens in real life

> Implemented stuff the customer doesn't care about
> Forgot stuff the customer cared about
> Customer wants a follow-up, never gets to see it until the end when it's finished
> Finds out some parts are overengineered, some underengineered
> Finds design flaws in production
> Ends up being too far in to correct those design flaws, just rewrite or add finicky patches

Then you never get any contract again from that customer, while he shares his experience with other firms. Company goes bankrupt.

There's a reason public sector projects fail miserably, they use your approach.

I've personally only been a part of smaller projects, so his methodology works quite well (though obviously doesn't scale).

In bigger projects, involving a ton of moving pieces like product managers, user stories etc. feels like it just slows down development further.

I think it's a waste of time honestly, but made some good points

It's a matter of saving time on a larger scale than a single team. Development is not just devs, it's multi-disciplines working together. Mentioning lean practices here is important: it's one implementation of agile. OP's diagram is misleading, this is basically scrum's iterative process, which does have some time wasting stuff like over planning and tracking of time/points for progress reporting which is useful mostly to be able to answer "when will it be ready?" Kanban when doing in a lean way, is in my experience the most efficient agile approach that can be implemented in real life, whereas my personal preference if management could grow the fuck up would be to do extreme programming with frequent reports.

It sucks, I fucking hate enterprise team development.

what's the alternative?

IMO Kanban is the superior and more dynamic way to go. It adapts better to all the different genres of businesses. And it's less of a train wreck to maintain over a long period of time. But that's just my two cents.

It doesn't work unless the whole company is designed around it and even then only for specific products. Companies love doing sprints and talking about agile but very few are actually agile.
Waterfall is a lot better.

aye, I feel the same way but you know how California companies get

Agile in practice is just managers yelling at people to do things faster
>sprints are fast
>gotta do lots of sprints
>go go go sprint sprint sprint

>never worked in the industry
Not him but we don't use agile at my work. We use waterfall.

>"""kanban"""
triggers me that people took one word from lean and now are calling it the next thing. I do like lean though.