Posted by Paul Gerrard on February 29, 2008 11:35 PM|Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://mt.uktmf.com/blog/mt-tb.cgi/35
Comments
Thanks for the apology Paul. Your original post was hard to read because I felt attacked personally, instead of my ideas being attacked. The latter is something I can deal with, even though I may not like it at first. If I feel personally attacked, emotions get in the way, and I have a hard time taking the good critical points along with it seriously. With this apology, I feel we can share some ideas and find common ground.
The post-Agilism ideas and examples are emerging slowly. There are some ideas in the works, and we'll be seeing more as time goes on. I purposely held back some of my own ideas because I and others do not want to come to conclusions prematurely. A lot of the ideas and experimentation are important. There is no formal movement yet, just different individuals and teams trying out different ideas.
The Agile movement was quite unique in the way different people seemed to burst on the scene with various similar methodologies and ideals. Uniting under a common front, and penning a manifesto was quite radical. However, it took time for the different leaders to experiment and converge, so I don't expect any new ideas to be as clearly defined without some experimentation and time.
I'm comfortable with the ambiguity and I'm excited by some of what I'm seeing, but I understand others want to see some conclusions. I'm a skeptic, so I like to hold off on coming to conclusions as long as possible. Sometimes that can be annoying to my friends who want uncertainty to be tamed as soon as possible. :)
I and others will be sharing more this year. One area I would like to see work in is building bridges between different software development ideals, instead of an "us vs. them" approach. My software development process fusion series will touch on this a bit. I know of others writing about a different approach to this.
However, testing work gets in the way for me as well, and it is easier to write about. Not to mention less controversial :-)
Thanks again for the apology. I appreciate it very much.
-Jonathan
Paul replies...
You are most welcome.
In a clumsy way, I was trying also to push poeple to commit to say what the new direction would be. I'm impatient - and shouldn't be.
Looking forward to meeting up in Orlando. IOU a beer. :-)
Comments
Thanks for the apology Paul. Your original post was hard to read because I felt attacked personally, instead of my ideas being attacked. The latter is something I can deal with, even though I may not like it at first. If I feel personally attacked, emotions get in the way, and I have a hard time taking the good critical points along with it seriously. With this apology, I feel we can share some ideas and find common ground.
The post-Agilism ideas and examples are emerging slowly. There are some ideas in the works, and we'll be seeing more as time goes on. I purposely held back some of my own ideas because I and others do not want to come to conclusions prematurely. A lot of the ideas and experimentation are important. There is no formal movement yet, just different individuals and teams trying out different ideas.
The Agile movement was quite unique in the way different people seemed to burst on the scene with various similar methodologies and ideals. Uniting under a common front, and penning a manifesto was quite radical. However, it took time for the different leaders to experiment and converge, so I don't expect any new ideas to be as clearly defined without some experimentation and time.
I'm comfortable with the ambiguity and I'm excited by some of what I'm seeing, but I understand others want to see some conclusions. I'm a skeptic, so I like to hold off on coming to conclusions as long as possible. Sometimes that can be annoying to my friends who want uncertainty to be tamed as soon as possible. :)
I and others will be sharing more this year. One area I would like to see work in is building bridges between different software development ideals, instead of an "us vs. them" approach. My software development process fusion series will touch on this a bit. I know of others writing about a different approach to this.
However, testing work gets in the way for me as well, and it is easier to write about. Not to mention less controversial :-)
Thanks again for the apology. I appreciate it very much.
-Jonathan
Paul replies...
You are most welcome.
In a clumsy way, I was trying also to push poeple to commit to say what the new direction would be. I'm impatient - and shouldn't be.
Looking forward to meeting up in Orlando. IOU a beer. :-)
Posted by: Jonathan Kohl | March 1, 2008 01:12 AM