Comments on t0rx on...: How many software developers does it take to write...

I think it depends on the type of software being d...

2011-11-01T03:47:54.339Z

I think it depends on the type of software being developed, If the software is small then it requirement will be less and if the software is being big then more people will be required for that.

Software Development India

I think my point is that any methodology that invo...

2009-01-14T17:44:00.000Z

I think my point is that any methodology that involves Pair Programming is one that can ONLY be done if you homogenize your resources to the same level. By its very nature, that eliminates the ability to have exceptional programmers, who are so far above the normal developer that they simply cannot work at the same rate as their "pair," and even if they could, that's really stupid to try to get them to.

Fundamentally, ANY strict methodology only works if you're doing boring work that doesn't require significant thought, just execution. You don't have alphas on those teams anyway by mutual agreement.

"Alpha" developers only annoy less able coders as ...

2009-01-14T11:17:00.000Z

"Alpha" developers only annoy less able coders as they provide a constant reminder of what a talented individual can produce. No amount of "process" will make a mediocre coder good; processes exist to keep managers in work and auditors happy.

Named software development processes (e.g. Agile, Scrum, etc) are the IT world's equivalent of self-help books. They push all the buzz-word buttons and provide "real-life examples" (that couldn't be more canned if Heinz made them); but ultimately they are 5% common sense and 95% wasted energy.

I know we're talking informally here, but I think ...

2009-01-13T17:09:00.000Z

I know we're talking informally here, but I think even so we're conflating two - theoretically, anyway - orthogonal traits: aptitude and attitude. Once you separate these, you realize that the aptitude matters, but the attitude - of each person in the group, not just the one with the highest aptitude - explains much of your intuition about team size. This reflects on Kirk's rant, which can be interpreted as arguing that aptitude begets attitude and and attitude isn't served by XP (pair programming especially).

Even "Alpha developer"s with "bad" attitudes work fine in large groups (where "fine" means "productive", not necessarily "in a civilised manner"), as long as their responsibilities don't overlap (otherwise aptitude has to be applied/tested through the filter of attitude). This partially explains why happy teams often suddenly get disrupted when broad decisions have to be taken.

To be fair, my rant was specifically about XP, NOT...

2009-01-13T09:26:00.000Z

To be fair, my rant was specifically about XP, NOT about Agile in general. Not every big-A Agile methodology has the precise set of points that I think turns off alpha programmers.

Also, my second rant only talked about Agile in the context of general absolutism (though I think you're right that the Agile camp tends to lend itself to purity about a whole bunch of things, which is kinda funny when you consider the number of named big-A Agile methodologies.... like religions, they can't all be right).