in reply to Re: Nobody Expects the Agile Imposition (Part VI): Architecture
in thread Nobody Expects the Agile Imposition (Part VI): Architecture
Out of curiosity, do Bookings staff members actively work on the Perl 5 C sources? Or do they just fund Perl development?
To further clarify, the main point of my scenario was to ponder whether employees of such a mythical company, working in Scrum cross-functional teams with a goal of producing "customer value", would be eager to work on the Perl 5 C code or whether they would try to avoid doing that and instead focus on writing new Perl 5 systems to provide "better customer value at a higher velocity" (and so get to drive a new BMW and park in one of the fancy spots:-). In this mythical scenario, the customer does not know or care about Perl, they just want their systems delivered on time that satisfy their needs. Perl is mimicking the closed-source "infrastructure or core component" that caused so many headaches for Schwaber when implementing Scrum in cross-functional teams that are meant to be self sufficient; that is, each team is meant to be capable of maintaining the Perl C sources.
|
---|
Replies are listed 'Best First'. | |
---|---|
Re^3: Nobody Expects the Agile Imposition (Part VI): Architecture
by Corion (Patriarch) on Jan 23, 2011 at 20:55 UTC | |
by JavaFan (Canon) on Jan 23, 2011 at 22:37 UTC | |
by eyepopslikeamosquito (Archbishop) on Jan 24, 2011 at 09:36 UTC | |
by techcode (Hermit) on Feb 03, 2011 at 09:21 UTC |