So here's the deal with Agile: everyone was (and still is, mostly) taught Anti-Agile software-engineering. Mistakes in "requirements" and "design" are costly, so we need to spend more time doing that before coding.
https://twitter.com/d_feldman/status/1368038046759751681
Agile preached the opposite. If mistakes in "requirements" and "design" are costly, then change your coding practices so that these mistakes are now cheap to fix.
A recently had to change requirements for my 'masscan' project. It was originally written with the requirement that it would always be IPv4 because scanning IPv6 address space isn't practical.
But it turns out, there's lots of reasons for scanning massive lists of IPv6 addresses, and hence, I needed to upgrade the scanner.
This required changing most of the code. Everywhere an IPv4 address appeared, I changed it to an IPv4+IPv6 address.
This required changing most of the code. Everywhere an IPv4 address appeared, I changed it to an IPv4+IPv6 address.
Such a massive "refactoring" of the code is possible because the "unit tests" have a lot of "code coverage". I could make changes with the knowledge that if I introduced errors, the unit tests would catch them.
Any legacy codebase can be made agile, no matter the anti-agile origins. First, write unit tests for the thing. Second, start refactoring.
However, don't hire "agile consultants". That'll just entrench crap processes rather than adding agility.
However, don't hire "agile consultants". That'll just entrench crap processes rather than adding agility.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
