For every project there is a correct development strategy. If NASA used agile or scrum they would not have the 1 in 100,000 lines of code defect rates that satelite system requires. You can't release and iterate away the bugs. If you do you wind up watching your system crash into Mars.
That said, you shouldn't have to spec out in excruciating detail every nuance of a website which is related to some Hollywood mogul's dog or fansite. That's something you'd iterate and fix while the customer gave you feedback.
There is a balance to everything and every a balance. Perhaps you should read a book like, Rapid Development. While it's slightly dated so is the mythical man month but both have lasting values. What these should teach is that there is no one way to do things but many. The project should dictate your approach not some evangelical software guru.
Disclaimer: This is in no way meant to imply that non-Agile are for "real" uses while Agile should be relegated to Scruffy McPointless projects.
As Wheaties mentioned, one strategy does not fit all situations. Agile approaches are usually well suited for products where either requirements are not known very well at the start and/or will be changing. The product is refined as the system is build iteratively and brought in-line with the customer's vision through collaboration with the customer. Now at the same time, from what I have seen, safety or something really expensive and unrecoverable e.g., a satellite, is usually not among the list of concerns for these projects.
Scrum and XP provide best practices for dealing with the management and engineering effort of being Agile respectively. You should freely adopt/modify these best practices for your circumstances but at the same time keep checking your implimentation against the spirit of Agile Manifesto.
Lastly, this interview with Linda Rising on InfoQ looks into if Agile is scientifically proven. Basically, are people in the Agile community giving themselves a "Sugar Pill"?
Interview Excerpt
Science is about experiments, about holding an idea for a short period of time and testing it and then examining the results of that test to find out whether or not the hypothesis holds up. That's really what Agile is about. Agile is about small experiments. I now believe that everything we do, not just software development, but our lives should be a series of small experiments.
We bring in every possible stakeholder, we bring in customers, we bring in users, testers work with developers. We are always examining carefully those sugar pills. Does it really work? What do you think? Are you happy with the results? That's the only thing that saves us - Agile itself. This series of small experiments.
How fairly agile and scrum processes will credit and admit your talent and passion while the scrum master/coach treat the team as one unit that accomplish user stories and converge through trial and error approach??!!!
If your PO is happy, the customers are happy, your BOSS is happy and your product is successful; then you should expect to see yourself and the team justly rewarded through increased pay and or other incentives (like vacation, stock, free lunch).
If you are looking to have Sunshine blown up you ass every day because of your "heroic" efforts that saved the day again then scrum will greatly disappoint you since agile processes by nature look to eliminate the hero position.
By the way you described your successful "2 month analysis" I would guess that your project was so well defined and or your niche so slow that you would have been successful no matter what process you used. Scrum shows its true advantage when you can't spend 2 months and come up with all the requirements and design.
发布评论
评论（3）
每个项目都有一个正确的发展策略。如果 NASA 使用敏捷或 Scrum，他们将无法达到卫星系统所需的十万分之一的代码缺陷率。您无法发布并迭代消除错误。如果你这样做了，你最终会看到你的系统坠入火星。
也就是说，您不必详细说明与某些好莱坞大亨的狗或粉丝网站相关的网站的每一个细微差别。这是您在客户向您提供反馈时迭代和修复的问题。
一切事物都有一个平衡，每一个平衡都有。也许你应该读一本书，比如快速开发。虽然它有点过时了，神话般的人月也是如此，但两者都有持久的价值。这些应该教导我们的是，做事的方法不只有一种，而是有多种。项目应该决定你的方法，而不是某个福音派软件大师。
免责声明：这绝不意味着暗示非敏捷用于“真正”的用途，而敏捷应归入 Scruffy McPointless 项目。
For every project there is a correct development strategy. If NASA used agile or scrum they would not have the 1 in 100,000 lines of code defect rates that satelite system requires. You can't release and iterate away the bugs. If you do you wind up watching your system crash into Mars.
That said, you shouldn't have to spec out in excruciating detail every nuance of a website which is related to some Hollywood mogul's dog or fansite. That's something you'd iterate and fix while the customer gave you feedback.
There is a balance to everything and every a balance. Perhaps you should read a book like, Rapid Development. While it's slightly dated so is the mythical man month but both have lasting values. What these should teach is that there is no one way to do things but many. The project should dictate your approach not some evangelical software guru.
Disclaimer: This is in no way meant to imply that non-Agile are for "real" uses while Agile should be relegated to Scruffy McPointless projects.
正如 Wheaties 所提到的，一种策略并不适合所有情况。敏捷方法通常非常适合那些在开始时对需求不太了解和/或将要发生变化的产品。随着系统的迭代构建，产品得到完善，并通过与客户的协作与客户的愿景保持一致。与此同时，据我所知，安全或一些非常昂贵且无法回收的东西（例如卫星）通常不在这些项目的关注范围之内。
Scrum 和 XP 分别提供了处理敏捷管理和工程工作的最佳实践。您应该根据您的情况自由采用/修改这些最佳实践，但同时不断检查您的实施是否符合 敏捷宣言。
最后，InfoQ 上 Linda Rising 的采访探讨了敏捷是否经过科学验证。基本上，敏捷社区的人们是在给自己服用“糖丸”吗？
采访摘录
As Wheaties mentioned, one strategy does not fit all situations. Agile approaches are usually well suited for products where either requirements are not known very well at the start and/or will be changing. The product is refined as the system is build iteratively and brought in-line with the customer's vision through collaboration with the customer. Now at the same time, from what I have seen, safety or something really expensive and unrecoverable e.g., a satellite, is usually not among the list of concerns for these projects.
Scrum and XP provide best practices for dealing with the management and engineering effort of being Agile respectively. You should freely adopt/modify these best practices for your circumstances but at the same time keep checking your implimentation against the spirit of Agile Manifesto.
Lastly, this interview with Linda Rising on InfoQ looks into if Agile is scientifically proven. Basically, are people in the Agile community giving themselves a "Sugar Pill"?
Interview Excerpt
如果你的 PO 快乐，顾客快乐，你的 BOSS 快乐，你的产品就成功；那么你应该期望看到自己和团队通过加薪和/或其他激励措施（如假期、股票、免费午餐）得到公正的回报。
如果你希望 Sunshine 每天都因为你的“英勇”努力再次拯救世界而让你大吃一惊，那么 Scrum 会让你大失所望，因为敏捷流程本质上就是要消除英雄的位置。
通过您描述成功的“2 个月分析”的方式，我猜测您的项目定义得如此明确，或者您的利基市场如此缓慢，以至于无论您使用什么流程，您都会成功。当您无法花 2 个月时间提出所有需求和设计时，Scrum 就显示出了它的真正优势。
If your PO is happy, the customers are happy, your BOSS is happy and your product is successful; then you should expect to see yourself and the team justly rewarded through increased pay and or other incentives (like vacation, stock, free lunch).
If you are looking to have Sunshine blown up you ass every day because of your "heroic" efforts that saved the day again then scrum will greatly disappoint you since agile processes by nature look to eliminate the hero position.
By the way you described your successful "2 month analysis" I would guess that your project was so well defined and or your niche so slow that you would have been successful no matter what process you used. Scrum shows its true advantage when you can't spend 2 months and come up with all the requirements and design.