All it does is let leadership not define what they actually want, and make changes on the fly, which leads to longer dev times and worse code. Fuck agile, bring back waterfall.

  • yesterdayshero@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    That totally sucks. But has nothing to do with agile. That could have happened with waterfall because you would have sat there and developed things in isolation only to find out at the end it wasn’t what was expected.

    • Blamemeta@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I guess thats true, but at least we would be able to point at a requirements doc instead of a mess of emails and messages.

      • yesterdayshero@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s the biggest problem with waterfall to be honest. You can sit there and point at requirements, but requirements can be interpreted differently. And that’s a bigger issue with waterfall because you’re handed a list of requirements with little context on what the purpose is of what you’re doing because you weren’t in any of the conversations earlier on in the process.

        Agile doesn’t mean you don’t have requirements. What happened really sucks. But you aren’t working in agile. You’re just being screwed.

        • Blamemeta@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yeah, maybe you’re right. Just wish my lead pushed back more, and was a technical person. Probably would’ve stopped this train wreck before it began.