I realize this thread had died, but...
> I am not sure that BRUF can be given the full blame for it, but in all
> our internal evaluations we score very low on requirement accuracy.
> Also, the start-up of new projects seem to last forever. It feels
> wasteful and demoralizing to the developers. (At least on my team)
I'm on a contract right now at a gov't agency, and there's a reason that I can only
realease to production every 6 months: the stakeholders won't allow it, because they
regard releases as destabilizing. This is to say, of course, that they would be
horrified by the very idea of continuous integration. Somehow, they find pages and
pages of BRUF reassuring; I won't belabor how perverse that is.
So what does one do? Well, I'm not going to work for 6 mos. w/o even knowing if my
code does what I think it ought to, or what I've told them it's going to. That means
retrofitting tests to legacy code, because I also can't work without knowing what the
existing code base does. The BRUF culture of my current workplace doesn't require me
to work in the BRUF way (i.e., waste countless hours pretending that I know what
nonexistent code does, or how it will pass nonexistent tests). In fact, it more or
less forces me to do as much XP as I am able with the few developers who will pair
with me, so that *I* don't have to wait six months to find out what I've been doing.
I concede that this necessitates a certain amount of duplicity, but it's committed in
good faith!
To Post a message, send it to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ad-free courtesy of objectmentor.com
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/extremeprogramming/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
