Hacker News Reader

Comment by neilk | Hacker News Reader

The article title is wrong; Agile-ness is not measured in the speed of an individual change from code to customer. Any production-server-fuxoring-code-cowboy can do a change faster.

The Agile way would slow down particular changes, with practices like testing. The theory is that you take a little more time for every change in order to maintain optimum speed over the long term.

View on HN

agile [aj-uhl, -ahyl] Pronunciation Key adjective

1. quick and well-coordinated in movement; lithe: an agile leap.

2. active; lively: an agile person.

3. marked by an ability to think quickly; mentally acute or aware: She's 95 and still very agile.

Although refutation by dictionary is a valued technique, I think its invalidated here by the capital A in Agile.

The word Agile appears exactly once in the article: the title (where every word is capitalized).

Yes, it's possible he's referring to Agile Programming but that's a stretch given all the other facts here.

Who says he didn't test the changes before he published them? In four hours of asynchronous communication, he did two design iterations, got feedback on both, and fixed a bug that someone found. And this was unplanned, in response to unsolicited feedback. What else should he have done to slow it down more?

I didn't test the changes before I published them. I basically did development on the running server. In fact for about 30 seconds the comments page was broken due to a bug.

I said that the article title was wrong, not that pg was wrong, or that Agile is even the best way to do things.

The equation of "we iterated faster == we're more Agile" is what I thought was retarded.

Honest confession? The original title was "Can Your Website Do This?" but I changed it to Agile so more people would read it. Notice that I never mentioned Agile in the entire article and it had nothing to do with it. Sneaky, I admit, but right now I'm trying to get more people to read my writing.

Have you tried actually writing interesting and engaging pieces? I know it's a little harder, but it's less of an arseholeish thing to do than manipulating social news sites.

Well, I spent about an hour writing the piece. I proofread it. I linked to the relevant parts of the dialog to make it easier to skim. I summarized for those who didn't want to follow links. I inserted screen shots for context. I linked to the other sites where it was being discussed. I added updates and clarifications in response to comments made on 3 different sites (mine, here, and reddit) to help the conversation. And it is related to Agile principles. Can I get some credit for doing those things?

I do apologize if you clicked on it looking for something about Agile and then found it uninteresting and unengaging.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com