I had a discussion with a friend recently about a pragmatic variation of this, more specifically, the feasiblity of using the coarse level evidence of when code is checked in.
Provided you work in a reasonably cohesive manner, your checkins can be related, at least through the files involved, to some work units and the elapsed time used to determine an average productivity.
This fits well with the Evidence-based Scheduling approach included in FogBugz. If you happen to have been spending time on other things to an unusual degree, then in future you will be more productive than the checkin rate suggests. Any error is on the safe side of over-allocating time.
The main flaw, for me, in an approach like this is that I typically interweave at least two projects, often more, in different repositories and languages. I would need to pull the details together and make a rough allocation of relative time between them to achieve the same thing. In a more focused team, I think repository date stamps may be good enough.
发布评论
评论（3）
听起来就像 Joel 写的 FogBugz 的内容。
Sounds like what Joel wrote FogBugz for.
我最近与一位朋友讨论了这种情况的实用变体，更具体地说，是使用代码签入时的粗略证据的可行性。
如果您以相当有凝聚力的方式工作，那么您的签入至少可以相关通过所涉及的档案，对一些工作单位和所用的时间来确定平均生产率。
这非常适合 FogBugz 中包含的基于证据的调度方法。 如果您碰巧在其他事情上花费的时间达到不寻常的程度，那么将来您的工作效率将比签到率显示的更高。 任何错误都是为了安全起见，过度分配时间。
对我来说，这种方法的主要缺陷是，我通常会在不同的存储库和语言中交织至少两个项目，通常是更多项目。 我需要将细节整合在一起，并对它们之间的相对时间进行粗略分配，以实现相同的目标。 在一个更加专注的团队中，我认为存储库日期戳可能就足够了。
I had a discussion with a friend recently about a pragmatic variation of this, more specifically, the feasiblity of using the coarse level evidence of when code is checked in.
Provided you work in a reasonably cohesive manner, your checkins can be related, at least through the files involved, to some work units and the elapsed time used to determine an average productivity.
This fits well with the Evidence-based Scheduling approach included in FogBugz. If you happen to have been spending time on other things to an unusual degree, then in future you will be more productive than the checkin rate suggests. Any error is on the safe side of over-allocating time.
The main flaw, for me, in an approach like this is that I typically interweave at least two projects, often more, in different repositories and languages. I would need to pull the details together and make a rough allocation of relative time between them to achieve the same thing. In a more focused team, I think repository date stamps may be good enough.
这不就是项目经理的职责吗？ ;)
Isn't that what project managers are for? ;)