New boss wants us to start using agile development

It's very hard to do agile right, especially after a set amount of people working together is reached. That's why a good agile coach is essential to help teams.

>waterfall with constantly-changing requirements
That's not even a thing, you idiot. By definition, waterfall methodology does not have constantly changing requirements. Are you seriously one of those retards who thinks that anything which isn't Agile must be Waterfall?

This. It's eventually used as a Shillelagh to beat your ass with, *every fucking time*.

Just like CMU's "Software Capability Maturity Model" BS before it.

Every fucking day: "What did you do yesterday? What are you doing today? What are you doing tomorrow?"

And a lot of times there's nothing to really report, since any non-Pajeet rated task is going to take a few days at the very least, and perhaps a few weeks or months if it's a big new piece of original code.

Reporting on the glacial pace of typical large-scale, nontrivial software develolment daily makes you sound like a Sperg more often than not.

It'll make you sound like you're making shit up unless you're a real slick talker, more often than not.

I had to tell one Pajeet scrum master to stop making weird faces at me in SCRUM meetings when I reported on the arcane embedded shit I was working on, since he didn't understand a lick of it.

Like I literally had to say, "When you make funny faces at people in the U.S. like that, it makes them think you think they're lying", and so on.

Evidence of beatings from the SCRUM site itself: the word "commit" has been deprecated.

"One of the most controversial updates to the 2011 Scrum Guide has been the removal of the term “commit” in favor of “forecast” in regards to the work selected for a Sprint. We used to say that the Development Team commits to which Product Backlog Items it will deliver by the end of the Sprint. Scrum now encourages the Development Team to forecast which Product Backlog Items it will deliver by the end of the Sprint. It may seem to be a simple wording change, but in fact there are strong reasons behind it, and surely it will have great implications.

When a commitment is broken or not fulfilled, it is usual to expect some sort of accountability, fault, or even compensation. When a forecast doesn’t come true, it is easier to think about matters such as learning from the experience, improvement and - in one word - empiricism, which at the end is what Scrum is about.

It is not uncommon (or unreasonable, frankly) for people on the business side to hear that the Development Team has committed to deliver a list of Product Backlog Items and take it literally. They expect to have every single item delivered at the end of the Sprint, at any price. And, what is even worse, they begin making plans, assumptions and decisions based on this not yet confirmed fact. Then, if the commitment is not fulfilled, they may try to “claim their guarantee”, and ask for liable individuals. This is especially frequent when the business has not yet gotten rid of their former command-and-control, non-agile project management mindset."

Imagine working for a Pajeet

It's fucked, like someone telling you to draw and then holding the pencil with you.

Better find a new job. :(

Attached: 1532454764944.jpg (500x500, 62K)

>reddit spacing

It can happen to you, too!

Attached: 1523935167960.jpg (590x750, 61K)

No, paragraphs, motherfucker.

Do you use them?

Attached: 1528936345454.jpg (555x350, 37K)

It's all shit that iterates, evolves and changes to a greater or lesser degree, whether you admit (incremental/agile/spiral) or deny (waterfall) it.

>almost every sentence is a paragraph by itself
sure, buddy

Waterfall has all the requirements defined before development starts. They do not change until they have been completed. If you have a changing requirements, it is not waterfall. That isn't even up for debate.

>that wasn't real agile

>real agile has never been tried

>”we’re going to use agile!”
>ends up meaning “we don’t want to spend time coming up with requirements, so just work your ass off while we move the goalposts and shovel on feature creep”

DON'T

My company introduced that shit a year ago, since then it's all been downhill. People working on whatever they feel like, shit isn't getting done and suddenly it's 4 weeks until shipping and you've still got an assload of bugs nobody wants to fix.

>brainlet detected

You misunderstand, all projects have changing requirements, even the FDA regulated ones I have worked on, the difference is if the methodology and manglement acknowledge this.

Agile embraces and manages changing requirements by using iterative development with a quick feedback cycle.

Waterfall ignores the changing requirements with no scheduling changes to accommodate the extra work but it still has to happen, so the development team swallows it somehow and the client only gets sight of the product at the end of the 6 months, at which point they realise its not what they want.

No that's my experience of agile development as well.

t. eri

Me and some other guy own a business together. And this is what we do.

Every day everyone writes down the tasks that he has.
Then everyone has to give it a letter. A, B or C.
A is important right now. C is not important.
Then we start working on A.

Its quite simple really.

And everyone knows what the others are up to.

this. it's great when people aren't shitting down your throat, just hope your managers are good

And then you also don't have people saddling each other up with useless work. Because the priorities are clear.
>you want to do me X?
>sure, I'll list it among my C tasks

So that sounds like agile development with sprint cycles of 1 day.

but he didn't mentioned a representative of the company hes developing the software to

Why are managers like this, my dudes? It's like they've never learned any management at all.

Congrats on cracking the code.

No problem. Your boss is a moron who does not know what agile development is, so just make a few pretty charts for him and then keep doing everything the same old way you've been doing it. Duh.

OK fine then explain to us what agile should be
and what it shoudn't be

Attached: KIVaAam.png (599x799, 442K)

>being a wage slave
i hope the pay is good and you know when to quit OP

>More software dev methodologies bullshit because heads want to jerk themselves off

Attached: 1531142000177.png (480x406, 55K)

Using it right now
>tfw ignoring the board and fucking around until the boss starts yelling
heh

Individuals and interactions over processes and tools
Working software over comprehensive documentation
Customer collaboration over contract negotiation
Responding to change over following a plan

Just that.

SCRUM and agile are different beast. In fact SCRUM no longer uses "agile" in it's defenition. SCRUM can be agile.

Agile is just mantra, manifesto etc. Just attitude and philosophy. Not a set of rules.
Still, the best "agile" process you can have is XP.

Since when is actual management knowledge required for management positions? Every manager I ever knew was just a huge cocksucker that specialized in climbing the corporate ladder.

Not an argument. It's still not waterfall.

Some managers know how to manage. Rare breeds.

because true waterfall is simply not possible.

I guess that explains it. One would think the profit-motive would make companies look for qualified managers, instead of doing that.

Agile is just like communism

What book/online ressource would you recommend to follow and teach agile?

Attached: file.png (250x250, 39K)

Not him but waterfall is great if you're autistic and like not only structure, but planning for the future. All of my personal projects use waterfall.

>we just have a bunch of tickets to do
>boss assigns tickets at sprint meeting
>finish your tickets early and claim extras for yourself and get gud shit
It's hella comfy but the problem is documentation. It's not consistent and I usually have to find the guy that wrote the code and ask him for more details if I'm adding a feature or something onto something he did for another ticket

>One would think the profit-motive would make companies look for qualified managers

There is no such thing as a degree in management therefore no manager is qualified.

>boss assigns tickets
Why?
Everybody should pick their tickets themselves, or decide as a team.

Well I'm new here so I've been getting easy things that my boss picks out
People volunteer for things they'd like to do, but if someone doesn't have a preference or something really needs to be done that no one volunteers for, it gets assigned