Re: Holy Smoke!

"Noons" <wizofoz2k_at_yahoo.com.au> wrote in message news:<3f5b38ae$0$14564$afc38c87_at_news.optusnet.com.au>...
> http://www.agilemodeling.com/essays/easingIntoAM.htm
>
> <QUOTE>
>
> I then led the evolution of the technique, for the most part via the Web although also at the XP 2001 conference held
> in Italy in May of that year. AM started out fairly complex and it grew a bit into its current form. In the time since
> I've been applying AM on projects, mentoring people in its techniques, teaching AM courses, and speaking about AM at a
> variety of conferences. The one thing that I've noticed is that many people struggle with its plethora of concepts -
> five values, eleven core principles, seven supplementary principles, thirteen core practices, and eight supplementary
> practices - so it shouldn't be any surprise that some people find AM complex. Sigh.
>
> </QUOTE>
>
>
> Hehehe! "Sigh" indeed!
> What a sad, sick joke...

Ouch. Check out their home page - not funny at all. Will be less so when the bean counters in charge of large-scale construction projects and the like mandate this sort of thing to their engineering communities in order to "cut costs". Come to think of it ...

<FURTHER QUOTE>

Agile models are more effective than traditional models because they are just barely good enough, they don't have to be perfect.

</FURTHER QUOTE>

Yup, I can't wait to drive across bridges that are "just barely good enough". Actually, living in the good ol' USA (NYC area), I probably do so already.

• GG