I work with pedagogies, teach, write curricula, coach, manage, mentor, consult, speak publicly, polemicize, and sometimes work as a full-stack web developer, architect, ontologist, and more.
Sorry, Thomas, but "the assumption that waterfall is a 'one directional process'" is not an assumption at all. It is the DEFINITION of the waterfall process. Hence if you iterate, then you are not strictly doing waterfall. You're doing some kind of hybrid.
And that, frankly, is what most enterprises are doing no matter how much they claim they're doing agile. Bullshit. What they're doing is a mix of agile and waterfall with, typically, a lot of useless crap thrown it to make it look more impressive.
Waterfall writes a spec, implements it, tests it, delivers it. Period. If you go back and change the spec, then you're not really doing waterfall.
So essentially you've found a hybrid that works for you (or so you believe) and it perhaps leans more toward waterfall. Nice. But it's simply not waterfall.
It's an exaggeration obviously to shake up things, also written because I'm tutoring a bunch of students whom I don't want to fall for the "let's just start coding Kool Aid" which is tempting because of the hype surrounding Agile ...
I work with pedagogies, teach, write curricula, coach, manage, mentor, consult, speak publicly, polemicize, and sometimes work as a full-stack web developer, architect, ontologist, and more.
Oh, yeah. I know exactly what you mean. The temptation to jump straight to coding is almost irresistible to most devs, just as most students in school never wrote an outline, they just jumped into the essay... with predictable results.
I loved the comment on your other post from the guy (there were probably several) who complained about your over the top language. I guess they've never heard of hyperbole.
Sometimes you have to exaggerate to get a point through, I'm fairly good at it unfortunately, giving predictable results (angry commenters that is ... ;)
But I don't complain, all eyeballs are good eyeballs ... ^_^
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
Sorry, Thomas, but "the assumption that waterfall is a 'one directional process'" is not an assumption at all. It is the DEFINITION of the waterfall process. Hence if you iterate, then you are not strictly doing waterfall. You're doing some kind of hybrid.
And that, frankly, is what most enterprises are doing no matter how much they claim they're doing agile. Bullshit. What they're doing is a mix of agile and waterfall with, typically, a lot of useless crap thrown it to make it look more impressive.
Waterfall writes a spec, implements it, tests it, delivers it. Period. If you go back and change the spec, then you're not really doing waterfall.
So essentially you've found a hybrid that works for you (or so you believe) and it perhaps leans more toward waterfall. Nice. But it's simply not waterfall.
It's an exaggeration obviously to shake up things, also written because I'm tutoring a bunch of students whom I don't want to fall for the "let's just start coding Kool Aid" which is tempting because of the hype surrounding Agile ...
Oh, yeah. I know exactly what you mean. The temptation to jump straight to coding is almost irresistible to most devs, just as most students in school never wrote an outline, they just jumped into the essay... with predictable results.
I loved the comment on your other post from the guy (there were probably several) who complained about your over the top language. I guess they've never heard of hyperbole.
Hahaha :D
Sometimes you have to exaggerate to get a point through, I'm fairly good at it unfortunately, giving predictable results (angry commenters that is ... ;)
But I don't complain, all eyeballs are good eyeballs ... ^_^