6 ms·

> Why have they reported at every standup the last six months Every what?

by ResearchCode 2y ago

khazhoux 2y ago
Standup. Daily meetings where teams talk about their blockers and so forth.
- ResearchCode 2y ago
  If six months of daily meetings did not lead anywhere then cancel those meetings.
  - khazhoux 2y ago
    Many teams have short daily gatherings — especially now that so many teams are fully distributed, it’s good for everyone to come together like that. But while every team member talks about the difficult bugs they’re facing, sometimes the actual code tells a different story and can reveal that a team member is struggling to get working code together in any reasonable amount of time.
    - ResearchCode 2y ago
      It sounds like you could just read their code and the meeting was unnecessary. Linux kernel developers are distributed but don't do daily status update meetings.
erinaceousjones 2y ago
heh, I note your recent comment history is you being salty about everything you deem "cargo cult agile", and people patiently responding to that. Yes, having a chat between the team for fifteen minutes every day is in fact quite useful, believe it or not. We're not talking about hour long waterfall-y management progress review meetings here.
- ResearchCode 2y ago
  Daily status updates are not useful. Linux kernel developers don't do them. I trust that nothing is stopping your engineers from having a chat and that their manager doesn't need to schedule their chats for them.
  - erinaceousjones 2y ago
    You speak in absolutes. What works for me, works for me :)
  - samatman 2y ago
    Cargo-culting someone else's process is a bad way to develop good process for your specific team and its needs. You could use the same logic to claim that "issues and PRs are not useful" because the Linux devs use a mailing list and patches. I think that's obviously absurd, all that this example shows is that a mailing list and patches can be a useful way to develop programs. It says nothing about alternatives at all.
    - ResearchCode 2y ago
      What specific needs are met by daily status updates? Professionals outside of software don't do that. The best software projects don't do that. It's very popular in CRUD projects led by non-technical middle management with trust issues.
      - samatman 2y ago
        > Professionals outside of software don't do that. How do you know this? Have you done an exhaustive search? For one example, are you quite certain that no part of any military ever does this? What about every factory?
        ResearchCode 2y ago
        You are not answering my question. No, you ask your acquaintances who work in law, finance or medicine. Neither does academia have any "stand up". What specific needs do CRUD software projects have that are met by infantilizing daily status reports? What needs for daily status reports do these projects have that the Linux kernel doesn't?

> Why have they reported at every standup the last six months Every what?

khazhoux 2y ago

Standup. Daily meetings where teams talk about their blockers and so forth.

ResearchCode 2y ago
If six months of daily meetings did not lead anywhere then cancel those meetings.
- khazhoux 2y ago
  Many teams have short daily gatherings — especially now that so many teams are fully distributed, it’s good for everyone to come together like that. But while every team member talks about the difficult bugs they’re facing, sometimes the actual code tells a different story and can reveal that a team member is struggling to get working code together in any reasonable amount of time.
  - ResearchCode 2y ago
    It sounds like you could just read their code and the meeting was unnecessary. Linux kernel developers are distributed but don't do daily status update meetings.

erinaceousjones 2y ago

heh, I note your recent comment history is you being salty about everything you deem "cargo cult agile", and people patiently responding to that. Yes, having a chat between the team for fifteen minutes every day is in fact quite useful, believe it or not. We're not talking about hour long waterfall-y management progress review meetings here.

ResearchCode 2y ago
Daily status updates are not useful. Linux kernel developers don't do them. I trust that nothing is stopping your engineers from having a chat and that their manager doesn't need to schedule their chats for them.
- erinaceousjones 2y ago
  You speak in absolutes. What works for me, works for me :)
- samatman 2y ago
  Cargo-culting someone else's process is a bad way to develop good process for your specific team and its needs. You could use the same logic to claim that "issues and PRs are not useful" because the Linux devs use a mailing list and patches. I think that's obviously absurd, all that this example shows is that a mailing list and patches can be a useful way to develop programs. It says nothing about alternatives at all.
  - ResearchCode 2y ago
    What specific needs are met by daily status updates? Professionals outside of software don't do that. The best software projects don't do that. It's very popular in CRUD projects led by non-technical middle management with trust issues.
    - samatman 2y ago
      > Professionals outside of software don't do that. How do you know this? Have you done an exhaustive search? For one example, are you quite certain that no part of any military ever does this? What about every factory?
      - ResearchCode 2y ago
        You are not answering my question. No, you ask your acquaintances who work in law, finance or medicine. Neither does academia have any "stand up". What specific needs do CRUD software projects have that are met by infantilizing daily status reports? What needs for daily status reports do these projects have that the Linux kernel doesn't?