I think the last time I heard an engineer unironically advocating for a waterfall IRL was about a decade ago and they were the one of the crab-in-a-bucket, I-refuse-to-learn-anything-new types—with that being the very obvious motivation for their push-back.

[+] alykanas@slrpnk.net -11 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Of course because they don’t like being held to estimates and deadlines.

…and when you agree to run it Agile, which calls for closer and continual communications with the users, the first thing they want is a rep to do it for them .

[–] LeGrognardOfLove@lemmygrad.ml 8 points 23 hours ago

No,

Serious teams know that building big software is hard and that starting by having a set deadline is the first failure point of a project.

Serious team wants a set budget and feature set. They also want a dialog with the aquiring party, because as you dig deeper in the software you uncover oddities. These oddities are more often than not a failure of the aquiring party understanding of their own business operations.

And thus, a serious team will help the aquiring party refine their business process by either removing useless steps, adding missings steps or changing a step in the overall workflow. And that's were the most of the value of making a new software comes from.

Doing waterfall will stop this from happening and will remove actual value from the software because it's going to be bloated with useless things that were badly understood by the aquiring party.

Agile is about producing as much value as possible, as fast as possible, in a set budget.

English is my third language so sorry if it's hard to understand or feel aggressive.

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments (4 replies)