• (cs) in reply to frits
    frits:
    Ha ha! Aikido? Street fight? You must be trolling, Steven Segal.

    You have a point. If I tried to attack someone who knew much aikido, it wouldn't really do to call it a 'fight'. More like "I'm on the ground now. ow."

  • Jay (unregistered)

    Okay, I get it. Agile doesn't hurt people. People hurt people.

  • Miss Management (unregistered)

    I see here a lot of misconceptions of "Agile Programming." There is only one definition that I care about: get it done as fast as you can, working on weekends if necessary. You programmers can leave it to yourself to discuss the pros and cons of the "proper" way of doing it over drinks later.

  • Jay (unregistered)

    Wow, next time I'll know better than to make even the most indirect criticism of Agile. It's far less incendiary to just make jokes about their mother's moral character.

    If you guys are this touchy about Agile, well, that just worries me. I mean, when someone insults some tool I use, Java or Postgres or whatever, I just shrug my shoulders and say, Yeah, whatever. Is there a reason why you're so defensive?

  • Bus Logic (unregistered) in reply to Miss Management
    Miss Management:
    I see here a lot of misconceptions of "Agile Programming." There is only one definition that I care about: get it done as fast as you can, working on weekends if necessary. You programmers can leave it to yourself to discuss the pros and cons of the "proper" way of doing it over drinks later.
    ^ THIS! It perfectly sums up why so many agile projects fail - female project manager.

    BAZZZZINGGGG!

  • Anonymous (unregistered) in reply to Jay
    Jay:
    Wow, next time I'll know better than to make even the most indirect criticism of Agile. It's far less incendiary to just make jokes about their mother's moral character.

    If you guys are this touchy about Agile, well, that just worries me. I mean, when someone insults some tool I use, Java or Postgres or whatever, I just shrug my shoulders and say, Yeah, whatever. Is there a reason why you're so defensive?

    Who are you replying to? Nobody has said anything to you or commented about your post so why are you getting so defensive?

  • (cs)

    Oh Man! That place is hell! All those Microsoft things, and ATM's, arg!!!

  • bl@h (unregistered)

    Wait wasn't the Excel macro left on the wooden tables, right next to the XML and the file system left out of the embedded device project?

  • CoderDan (unregistered) in reply to James
    James:
    Can people stop blaming agile for such problems!?! This is clearly caused by VB.

    Actually, any language could have been used. The real issue is lack of decent programming. To have anything being updated from a spreadsheet is always iffy.

  • somedude (unregistered)

    When the words "agile development" are mentioned in a job interview, what they really mean is "code like hell" of course.

  • (cs) in reply to akatherder
    akatherder:
    So today I learned that agile developers can't take a joke. Even when the joke isn't on them.

    Actually, I thought the 'FRagile' joke about 'cutting corners' was cute. :)

    Ironically, most of the methodologies are about making random haphazard development -less- fragile. Hence things like 'test-first development' and 'short 2-week sprints' and 'weekly retrospectives on process breakdowns' and even 'pair programming'. So yes, that's exactly what it's about: making the "git 'er done" live-for-the-day programming that keeps your business alive less FRagile... basically, trying to have it both ways.

    The fragility of waterfall development, by contrast, is fragility against changing requirements. If you know exactly what you're going to do, by all means do waterfall. If it could change tomorrow and blow up in your face, by all means keep away and choose agile.

  • CoderDan (unregistered) in reply to The Nerve
    The Nerve:
    Here's the military equivalent of agile programming.

    Ok, boys: listen up. You're going to take Baghdad. There are some rumors that it's going to take 120 days and $45 Billion. You have two weeks and $50k. There will be no battle plan, because the plans always have to change once you get into a combat situation anyway. We will be putting the infantry, snipers, artillery, medics, and intelligence in the same transport so that communication will be quicker and easier.

    Yes, we've tried this about a dozen times before, but we feel that you'll be the ones who are successful! Oh, and if you can find your own weapons and ammunition, that would be great.

    +1

    Captcha: appellatio.... between that and ATM.. This post has gone down quickly

  • The Nerve (unregistered) in reply to somedude
    somedude:
    When the words "agile development" are mentioned in a job interview, what they really mean is "code like hell" of course.

    You hit the nail on the head. Miss Management and her ilk could care less about what developers think is a sound approach. The design department here loves it too, because they use it as an excuse to make their requirements much less vague.

  • (cs) in reply to fennec
    fennec:
    I think it's more like running into a dorky kid pretending he knows kung-fu and making a fool of himself. If he's lucky, he'll lose your balance and wipe out *before* he has his rear end handed to you on a platter. But if you actually run into the kung-fu master in a street fight, the wannabe kid doesn't mean you'll be in less trouble anyway.

    Those are some of the most confusing pronouns I have ever seen. Well done.

  • (cs) in reply to Matt K
    Matt K:
    Clearly the issue is not the horrid and conveluded "design" of the system, but just Microsoft.

    Captcha: plaga - the plural form of plague?

    Yes as an official *nix or Mac zealot (take your pick). I completely agree :-) The developers aren't just incompetent, oh no, its just MS' or even the agile process' fault. Yeah that's it.

  • EngleBart (unregistered) in reply to highphilosopher
    highphilosopher:
    Matt K:
    Clearly the issue is not the horrid and conveluded "design" of the system, but just Microsoft.

    Captcha: plaga - the plural form of plague?

    Actually the issue is the developer who wrote a database update routine in an Excel spreadsheet.

    Captcha: enim - enum if your south of the Mason-Dixon line.

    They should have at least wrapped the Excel function in a stored procedure (pseudo code follows):

    HackToUpdate_CAL_via_Excel_on_Martys_Desk(....) {
  if (client_ip != Martys_DESK_IP)
    error("You are not authorized")
  else {
    // use the pre-existing routine to update the Cal
    Call Convert_SpreadSheet()
    Call PUpd_Cal_ATM()
  }
}
  • EngleBart (unregistered) in reply to Bus Logic
    Bus Logic:
    Funny how this has devolved into an agile flame-war. IMHO you should never have even mentioned agile in the article because it just muddies the water. Obviously the original submission had some detail about how they use agile but use it wrong, the usual crap (I've found about 75% of agile shops are "doing it wrong" so this isn't surprising in the least). So Alex decided to include a bit about how they're doing it wrong but the truth is that agile had nothing to do with the actual issue in today's article. The fact they were using agile (badly) is just an extra bit of fluff that is completely irrelevant to the actual WTF. Simply put, it shouldn't have been used as a key part of the article because it's kicked off a completely unnecessary flame-war.

    Just my opinion though. Hopefully we'll get some REAL agile WTFs at some point and we can have a proper discussion about it (ha ha, a proper discussion on TDWTF!!).

    I am still waiting for the American Football equivalent to Scrum before I adopt Agile. It is too confusing trying to teach everyone rugby so they can understand the process. Also, an American Football equivalent would be superior since they could include concepts like:

    1. forward pass
    2. first downs
    3. punting (already included in many teams processes)
    4. patting each other on the rump. Note: consult with HR before adding this one!
    5. Touch Down! (Even though I think I would substitute this one with Goooooooaaaaaallllllllll!!!! from international football/soccer)
  • Ben L. (unregistered)

    SELECT ID FROM my_table WHERE ID = '3' AND ID != 2 LIMIT 0

  • Aumatar (unregistered) in reply to Someone You Know
    Someone You Know:
    fennec:
    I think it's more like running into a dorky kid pretending he knows kung-fu and making a fool of himself. If he's lucky, he'll lose your balance and wipe out *before* he has his rear end handed to you on a platter. But if you actually run into the kung-fu master in a street fight, the wannabe kid doesn't mean you'll be in less trouble anyway.

    Those are some of the most confusing pronouns I have ever seen. Well done.

    Fixing pronoun usage is in the next sprint.

  • quisling (unregistered) in reply to Jay
    Jay:
    Okay, I get it. Agile doesn't hurt people. People hurt people.
    clap, clap

    It is rather delightful, though, every time Alex climbs back on the Trololagile wagon... >XD

  • The Nerve (unregistered) in reply to Aumatar

    No, put it in the "backlog" where it can be ignored forever.

  • CoderDan (unregistered) in reply to The Nerve
    The Nerve:
    No, put it in the "backlog" where it can be ignored forever.

    I feel so productive when my burndown phase turns into realignment.

    Captcha: jugis

  • (cs)

    Wow, the Agile Defenders really got their panties in a bunch today! A few posts have had a certain strange uh, enthusiasm, that one usually only encounters when trying to talk sense in to a Mac fanatic.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FL7yD-0pqZg (moderately NSFW, language)

  • The Nerve (unregistered) in reply to jamface
    jamface:
    A company I worked at used the waterfall development model.

    That usually meant that developers didn't see any requirements until they were all complete and didn't get to ask questions or get clarifications into the spec!

    One day, a bit of code went wrong. It was totally unrelated to the development process, and caused by an upgrade that overwrote files without notification.

    Oh the joys of waterfall development!

    Here, we use the "dam" (levee) method. Every minute change requires a log-jam of requirements in order to keep only the smallest trickle of changes running into production. I have worked where they use the "toilet" paradigm: let you spend weeks of time working on vaguely-defined requirements only to flush it and start over on something else. Working on "agile" (Karate Kid chopstick method), wasn't much better. Emphasis was on catching as many flies (rapidly changing "goals") as possible, as management shoveled in rotting meat.

    I wonder how many more under-engineering methods that we can invent? A poster on here days ago commented that software had not yet reached Roman aqueduct-capability and was centuries away from the Age of Steam.

  • Jared (unregistered) in reply to The Nerve
    The Nerve:
    Ok, boys: listen up. You're going to take Baghdad. There are some rumors that it's going to take 120 days and $45 Billion. You have two weeks and $50k. There will be no battle plan, because the plans always have to change once you get into a combat situation anyway. We will be putting the infantry, snipers, artillery, medics, and intelligence in the same transport so that communication will be quicker and easier.

    Yes, we've tried this about a dozen times before, but we feel that you'll be the ones who are successful! Oh, and if you can find your own weapons and ammunition, that would be great.

    It works in unreal tournament, Counter-Stike, Left 4 Dead and most major action movies... Why wouldn't it work in Iraq?!?!?

  • (cs) in reply to RogerWilco
    RogerWilco:
    highphilosopher:
    Actually the issue is the developer who wrote a database update routine in an Excel spreadsheet.

    Captcha: enim - enum if your south of the Mason-Dixon line.

    I've found that a lot of these things get "developed" by some business unit by a guy that, if you're lucky has an MBA and a VB course. Only after it's been in "production" for years and the guy has left and the IT department now has so maintain the spaghetti, do these things get the form described in the article.

    As an example, I know for a fact that 40% of our Dutch national electricity grid was run by an Excel95 application until very recently. They had it running on NT6 SP3, SP6 broke it, as did any newer OS. When I left the company it was still in use, this piece of mystery code being responsible for about 100 million euro in trade and the electricity supply of about 7 million people.

    LOL!! Truly terrifying and this should be a featured comment.

  • Laughter: The Best Medicine (unregistered) in reply to EngleBart
    EngleBart:
    Bus Logic:
    Funny how this has devolved into an agile flame-war. IMHO you should never have even mentioned agile in the article because it just muddies the water. Obviously the original submission had some detail about how they use agile but use it wrong, the usual crap (I've found about 75% of agile shops are "doing it wrong" so this isn't surprising in the least). So Alex decided to include a bit about how they're doing it wrong but the truth is that agile had nothing to do with the actual issue in today's article. The fact they were using agile (badly) is just an extra bit of fluff that is completely irrelevant to the actual WTF. Simply put, it shouldn't have been used as a key part of the article because it's kicked off a completely unnecessary flame-war.

    Just my opinion though. Hopefully we'll get some REAL agile WTFs at some point and we can have a proper discussion about it (ha ha, a proper discussion on TDWTF!!).

    I am still waiting for the American Football equivalent to Scrum before I adopt Agile. It is too confusing trying to teach everyone rugby so they can understand the process. Also, an American Football equivalent would be superior since they could include concepts like:

    1. forward pass
    2. first downs
    3. punting (already included in many teams processes)
    4. patting each other on the rump. Note: consult with HR before adding this one!
    5. Touch Down! (Even though I think I would substitute this one with Goooooooaaaaaallllllllll!!!! from international football/soccer)

    We actually had multiple "Fantasy Football" teams going that would go head-to-head. Teams were assigned points based on meeting deadlines, bug fixed, etc. Originally, multiple teams were on the same schedule and "played" against each other. This method quickly got thrown into disarray when the very first week more than one team missed their "deadlines" and teams then played each other at unpredictable times.

    It would make more sense to me to have QA vs. Programmers. The more buggy the software, and QA would "win." The fewer bugs QA could find, Programmers would win.

  • swedish tard (unregistered) in reply to Laughter: The Best Medicine
    Laughter: The Best Medicine:
    EngleBart:
    Bus Logic:
    Funny how this has devolved into an agile flame-war. IMHO you should never have even mentioned agile in the article because it just muddies the water. Obviously the original submission had some detail about how they use agile but use it wrong, the usual crap (I've found about 75% of agile shops are "doing it wrong" so this isn't surprising in the least). So Alex decided to include a bit about how they're doing it wrong but the truth is that agile had nothing to do with the actual issue in today's article. The fact they were using agile (badly) is just an extra bit of fluff that is completely irrelevant to the actual WTF. Simply put, it shouldn't have been used as a key part of the article because it's kicked off a completely unnecessary flame-war.

    Just my opinion though. Hopefully we'll get some REAL agile WTFs at some point and we can have a proper discussion about it (ha ha, a proper discussion on TDWTF!!).

    I am still waiting for the American Football equivalent to Scrum before I adopt Agile. It is too confusing trying to teach everyone rugby so they can understand the process. Also, an American Football equivalent would be superior since they could include concepts like:

    1. forward pass
    2. first downs
    3. punting (already included in many teams processes)
    4. patting each other on the rump. Note: consult with HR before adding this one!
    5. Touch Down! (Even though I think I would substitute this one with Goooooooaaaaaallllllllll!!!! from international football/soccer)

    We actually had multiple "Fantasy Football" teams going that would go head-to-head. Teams were assigned points based on meeting deadlines, bug fixed, etc. Originally, multiple teams were on the same schedule and "played" against each other. This method quickly got thrown into disarray when the very first week more than one team missed their "deadlines" and teams then played each other at unpredictable times.

    It would make more sense to me to have QA vs. Programmers. The more buggy the software, and QA would "win." The fewer bugs QA could find, Programmers would win.

    O perhaps count how many new vs solved bugs there are at the start compared to the end of each "match" :) If fewer live bugs, programmers win, if more, testers win.

  • Ryan (unregistered) in reply to somedude

    Be careful, your ignorance is showing....

  • Andrew (unregistered)

    Where are the design/requrement documents? That's right Agile says the code is the document.

    Please update the buisness process to follow the documentaion and quit blaming Agile.

  • Chris P (unregistered) in reply to RogerWilco
    RogerWilco:
    highphilosopher:
    Actually the issue is the developer who wrote a database update routine in an Excel spreadsheet.

    Captcha: enim - enum if your south of the Mason-Dixon line.

    I've found that a lot of these things get "developed" by some business unit by a guy that, if you're lucky has an MBA and a VB course. Only after it's been in "production" for years and the guy has left and the IT department now has so maintain the spaghetti, do these things get the form described in the article.

    As an example, I know for a fact that 40% of our Dutch national electricity grid was run by an Excel95 application until very recently. They had it running on NT6 SP3, SP6 broke it, as did any newer OS. When I left the company it was still in use, this piece of mystery code being responsible for about 100 million euro in trade and the electricity supply of about 7 million people.

    The company that powers my area uses excel applications to monitor its transformer stations, except they use WinXP and office 2003. I hope no one cracks the encryption on their wireless access, or several thousand people are severely effed.

    captcha: opto - about half OPeraTiOnal

  • caffeine (unregistered) in reply to TheCPUWizard
    TheCPUWizard:
    1) That is NOT AGILE! It is chaos, and would NOT happen if proper Agile practices were in place

    I'd condense that to 'this would not happen if proper practices were in place

    TheCPUWizard:
    2) Who allows Microsoft (or Any Other) updates withough a proper progression from Dev->QA->UAT->Production??? The cange to Excel Macros was VERY well documented in the Knowledgbase Article that accompanied the update.

    Thank goodness I wasn't alone in this thought... having production servers on 'auto-update' is... well... lazy at best, downright dangerous at worst. Much as there has been an MS flaming here, there is a reason they document updates and have mechanisms for selective installs.

    CAPTCHA: Damnum. Seems appropriate.

  • Leo (unregistered) in reply to The Nerve
    The Nerve:
    sil-chan:
    This is not agile. This is what companies think agile should be but it is not what agile is.

    I love this un-assailable argument. "Agile Development is teh bestest!" Wait, but this does not work or make sense. "It's because that is not teh Agile Development!"

    I hear the same arguments regarding Communism.

    It's usually called the "No True Scotsman" fallacy.

  • BentFranklin (unregistered)

    Very agile, Howie.

    Captcha: modo - what yo git from yo ho

  • (cs) in reply to Don Lassini
    Don Lassini:
    Quote: >Or misfortune, depending on how you look at it: at his company, "agile development" actually means "we need that in two weeks".<

    To you guys who felt offended on behalf of Agile: Didn't you read the above sentence? It totally full of sarcasm....

    I really hate it when management misconstrues things like agile development to just mean something they want. Our management considers Agile development to mean "Have developers fill out half a dozen forms before they make a change in code." I've tried to convince them that is actually the opposite of what agile means but to no avail.

  • fjf (unregistered) in reply to Ken B.
    Ken B.:
    Rather, while they shot themselves in the foot, they are the ones who got the gun, loaded the gun, pointed it at their foot, and cocked the trigger. Microsoft only walked by and happened to bump into it, setting it off.
    Nice image!

    Microsoft seems to do a lot of walking these days.

  • keith (unregistered) in reply to Incourced
    Incourced:
    --SEARCH HIGH AND LOW select object_name(object_ID), definition from sys.sql_modules where definition like '%Cal_ATM%'

    I was about to propose search * from information_schema.Routines where routinedefinition like '%Cal_ATM%' but there is more than one road to Dublin.

    Also, start SQL Server Profiler.

  • (cs) in reply to Darth Buzzword
    Darth Buzzword:
    I have Agiled the project...pray I don't agile it any further.

    Shooting-milk-out-the-nose funny.

  • (cs) in reply to Someone You Know
    Someone You Know:
    fennec:
    I think it's more like running into a dorky kid pretending he knows kung-fu and making a fool of himself. If he's lucky, he'll lose your balance and wipe out *before* he has his rear end handed to you on a platter. But if you actually run into the kung-fu master in a street fight, the wannabe kid doesn't mean you'll be in less trouble anyway.

    Those are some of the most confusing pronouns I have ever seen. Well done.

    Totally agree. I'd like to see someone diagram THOSE sentences.

  • (cs)

    This article made me sad. The reason why is in the last year (new job), the number of clandestine spreadsheets used for "critical" processes that get uncovered when trying tracing issues. Our team is a fairly new team tasked with the job of cleaning up the systems after years of contractors, third party providers and traders (the 'clients') themselves having unfettered access to develop whatever they want with scant regard to any kind of architecture. This hit very close to home.

    What did cheer me up though was reading all agile supporters' defensive comments, when clearly this WTF was not a direct attack on agile development itself. Funny.

  • (cs) in reply to SQLDave
    SQLDave:
    Someone You Know:
    fennec:
    I think it's more like running into a dorky kid pretending he knows kung-fu and making a fool of himself. If he's lucky, he'll lose your balance and wipe out *before* he has his rear end handed to you on a platter. But if you actually run into the kung-fu master in a street fight, the wannabe kid doesn't mean you'll be in less trouble anyway.

    Those are some of the most confusing pronouns I have ever seen. Well done.

    Totally agree. I'd like to see someone diagram THOSE sentences.

    Oych. Agree. And I wrote the thing.

  • iMalc (unregistered) in reply to Zaratustra
    Zaratustra:
    My company uses the waterfall model, except it's not water falling, if you get my drift.
    If by that you mean that the water flows upwards, then yeah we have one of those in my country, where the water is always windblown upwards.

    I think the company I work for sometimes follows that model, the requirements often seem to come last!

  • (cs) in reply to fennec
    fennec:
    akatherder:
    So today I learned that agile developers can't take a joke. Even when the joke isn't on them.
    Actually, I thought the 'FRagile' joke about 'cutting corners' was cute. :)
    Awww, gee, thanks. The FRagile epithet was aimed at the agile developers' egos, not the method itself.

    I develop safety critical embedded applications (yeah, without a filesystem). If I so much as mentioned the word 'agile' I'd be pilloried, burned at the stake, hung, drawn, quartered and given a severe talking-to so I didn't do it again!

  • ablue (unregistered) in reply to akatherder
    akatherder:
    Here's a summary of the story and the comments...

    Story:

    My company is stupid. How stupid? I'm part of the "agile development" team and all I do is fix critical bugs. So anyways, here's a bug I fixed that was really silly.

    Comments:

    1. This would have happened with any development technique, not just agile!
    2. Oh my gaaaahhhd, this isn't agile's fault :~(
    3. But what does this bug have to do with agile?
    4. WHY ARE YOU BLAMING AGILE!????

    So today I learned that agile developers can't take a joke. Even when the joke isn't on them.

    Rule 1. of agile development. You don't talk about agile development.

  • Coder (unregistered)

    The real programmers have taken over microsoft. Their mission: to break all systems built using MS RAD or 4GL or GUI design tools. No computer system shall be permitted to continue in use unless it was constructed by the orthodox priesthood. Programs not written in C,C#, or some other derivative, are an offence against nature.

  • ceiswyn (unregistered) in reply to Andrew
    Andrew:
    Where are the design/requrement documents? That's right Agile says the code is the document.

    It really doesn't, you know.

    Developers often use Agile as an excuse to not write the documents. Developers will use anything as an excuse to not write the documents. Agile absolutely requires solid documentation, though; not of exactly how things are going to be coded, but of the user needs that are driving the development. It's when people get lost in a maze of specific functionality and forget what the customers are actually trying to do that it all goes wrong.

    Captcha: sagaciter. This is how you know I know best.

  • Schol-R-LEA (unregistered) in reply to caffeine
    caffeine:
    The problem obviously isn't agile development, rather with quick and dirty, multi-technology development with, presumably, poor diagnostic capabilities.
    Well, you're right, and so there you have TRWTF: that terms like 'Agile' are often tossed around by people who don't really understand them, and that Agile in particular is often used as an excuse for cowboy coding and sloppy processes.

    OTOH, I've often defined 'Agile Development' as 'a stopgap solution to the mess made by older approaches, with the tacit admission that no-one in the Software Engineering world really has any idea what they're doing yet.' But then, I really think that such an admission is necessary in order for the field as a whole to make any progress, so...

  • (cs) in reply to iMalc
    iMalc:
    Zaratustra:
    My company uses the waterfall model, except it's not water falling, if you get my drift.
    If by that you mean that the water flows upwards, then yeah we have one of those in my country, where the water is always windblown upwards.

    I think the company I work for sometimes follows that model, the requirements often seem to come last!

    I don't think he's talking about water. ;)

  • (cs) in reply to keith

    That is what I used to do, but information_schema.routines truncates at 4000 characters for no good reason as far as I can tell.

    I would add though, if you are going to use SQL Server, SQL Server Profiler is probably the smarter way to get a feel for what is going on. I never thought of that.

  • (cs) in reply to keith
    keith:
    Incourced:
    --SEARCH HIGH AND LOW select object_name(object_ID), definition from sys.sql_modules where definition like '%Cal_ATM%'

    I was about to propose search * from information_schema.Routines where routinedefinition like '%Cal_ATM%' but there is more than one road to Dublin.

    Also, start SQL Server Profiler.

    That is what I used to do, but information_schema.routines truncates at 4000 characters for no good reason as far as I can tell.

    I agree though, if you are going to use SQL Server, SQL Server Profiler is probably the smarter way to get a gppd feel for what is going on. I never thought of that.

Leave a comment on “Uncovering Nothing”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

Log Out

« Return to Article