|
MisterZimbu posted:I think we need to implement code reviews for the solely so the other developers will spell their class/file names correctly and tab poo poo in consistently. Spelling sure, but why not pump the code through a auto-formatter?
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 16:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 00:26 |
|
|
IAmKale posted:Do you guys have any good resources for practicing for technical interviews? I'm trying to make a slight career adjustment away from overly broad "do everything IT-related" into a more backend development-oriented line of work, but I've never never had to face interviews more suitable for programming jobs. I was impressed (but also saddened) by Triplebyte's How to Pass a Programming Interview.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 16:47
|
|
|
ratbert90 posted:Spelling sure, but why not pump the code through a auto-formatter? Yeah this is the answer.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 17:22
|
|
|
Doc Hawkins posted:I was impressed (but also saddened) by Triplebyte's How to Pass a Programming Interview. The bias against enterprise programmers sucks, I love my enterprise programming job and I love the fact that I get to use .NET and C#. It's really too bad that this will look negative on me if I ever decide to apply for a startup, I probably won't, but still.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 17:24
|
|
|
It's not technology, it's the culture and the pace of development that startups worry about when considering former enterprise people. Show some enthusiasm, show a great project you (supposedly) slapped together in a weekend, and it won't be a problem.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 17:36
|
|
|
IAmKale posted:Do you guys have any good resources for practicing for technical interviews? I'm trying to make a slight career adjustment away from overly broad "do everything IT-related" into a more backend development-oriented line of work, but I've never never had to face interviews more suitable for programming jobs. I've done a few technical interviews, so if you want I'm happy to grill you over a specific position.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2016 04:04
|
|
|
MisterZimbu posted:I think we need to implement code reviews for the solely so the other developers will spell their class/file names correctly and tab poo poo in consistently. Code can be autoformatted, but gently caress you if you spell your class and file name incorrectly, even after you are told so several times before merging to master.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2016 06:59
|
|
|
I read somewhere, some time again, that sprint points shouldn't be used as a measure of productivity. I also read that they probably shouldn't be used to determine promotions on. Is that true? Why is it true? I'm trying to build a good case against using them for promotions. I could be wrong though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 01:53
|
|
|
Sprint points need to be estimated in good faith, and tying compensation to them introduces an incentive to estimate strategically instead, by e.g. chronic padding. It also means that stories that were underestimated can hurt people unfairly. It's not as bad as lines of code as a proxy for productivity, but it's still not a good one. If you want to identify the most productive programmers on a team, and you're convinced you can do so using numbers alone, you need to find metrics that are difficult to manipulate by means other than actually being productive. As a corollary, you need to have an actionable definition of "productive."
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 02:19
|
|
|
Sprint points for promotions, oh my god 
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 02:24
|
|
|
KoRMaK posted:I read somewhere, some time again, that sprint points shouldn't be used as a measure of productivity. I also read that they probably shouldn't be used to determine promotions on.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 02:30
|
|
|
Sprint points are meant to be a tool to help a team estimate its workload and how much it can reasonably get done. If you start to tie any metrics at all whatsoever to them they will no longer serve that purpose and will start to be whatever they are incentivized to be. At my work the director of development decided that every team must meet 80% of its sprint commitments and our reviews are tied to that metric. Before that decision we would commit in good faith and try to figure out what went wrong when we didn't meet our sprint goal. Now, we meet our commitment 100% of the time since it affects our compensation. You get exactly what you incentivize for.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 02:34
|
|
|
BigSlacks posted:Sprint points are meant to be a tool to help a team estimate its workload and how much it can reasonably get done. If you start to tie any metrics at all whatsoever to them they will no longer serve that purpose and will start to be whatever they are incentivized to be. At my work the director of development decided that every team must meet 80% of its sprint commitments and our reviews are tied to that metric. Before that decision we would commit in good faith and try to figure out what went wrong when we didn't meet our sprint goal. Now, we meet our commitment 100% of the time since it affects our compensation. You get exactly what you incentivize for. My manager did the same thing, but since I didn't have good evidence against it before we started he went "meh lets do it anyway." Now, two years later.... I'm trying to get promoted to Lead Developer which is a team lead position, and one of the "areas for improvement" (thing keeping me from that promotion) is that our sprint commitment completion isn't good enough. I should be able to estimate and deliver within 85% of the commitments. In the context of being a team lead, does that change your guys assessment and seem fair? I feel like since it's about the teams effort and I'm going after a leadership position it kind of makes sense, but my gut says that it is an oversimplification of the practical effort and progress that I make and help enable others to make. Also, in our situation, we loosely take into account the overhead that I already have to do to onboard and coach a new developer and other admin tasks, so the story points per sprint are taking that into consideration in a way. Also, we take into account that the new developer has a lower point throughput. So what this means is that we are determining how many sprint points to queue up on an individual basis and also assigning the stories BEFORE the sprint starts. I still feel like something is hosed up with it though and that it is too much a simplification to hang a promotion/raise on. tl;dr Is basing a team lead promotion on the teams story point sprint completion rate a fair thing to do? KoRMaK fucked around with this message at 02:54 on Apr 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 02:52
|
|
|
I honestly think using any numerical metric to determine performance is Very Bad and those things should be figured out by TLs/managers who actually are aware of their reports' responsibilities and achievements and can be trusted with making those evaluations intelligently. But haha why bother when we've got Agile Points and most TLs/managers are not good or capable of using logic or reason or fair judgement and we can say we're being DATA DRIVEN.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 02:58
|
|
|
KoRMaK posted:I'm trying to get promoted to Lead Developer which is a team lead position, and one of the "areas for improvement" (thing keeping me from that promotion) is that our sprint commitment completion isn't good enough. I should be able to estimate and deliver within 85% of the commitments. In the context of being a team lead, does that change your guys assessment and seem fair? I feel like since it's about the teams effort and I'm going after a leadership position it kind of makes sense, but my gut says that it is an oversimplification of the practical effort and progress that I make and help enable others to make. How dumb are you? Just inflate your team's estimates until you meet your "goals" 100% of the time. Perception is reality.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 03:32
|
|
|
baquerd posted:How dumb are you? Just inflate your team's estimates until you meet your "goals" 100% of the time. Perception is reality. Not to pile on, but yeah, how have you not already been doing this? Imagine having your performance measured in lines of code you commit every week. Tell me, how long is it going to take before your code looks like this? code:
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 03:37
|
|
|
baquerd posted:How dumb are you? Wow, rude. baquerd posted:How dumb are you? Just inflate your team's estimates until you meet your "goals" 100% of the time. Perception is reality. e: Skandranon posted:Not to pile on It's an honor system sort of thing. I should still be estimating in good faith. Please stop focusing on this. I am already aware of the premise. I'd like to get work to do the right thing first. This has the benefit of making a good environment as we grow and bring more people onto the team. KoRMaK fucked around with this message at 03:42 on Apr 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 03:37
|
|
|
KoRMaK posted:This isn't really the game I want to play is why I haven't already done it. Yeah, pretty much no one wants to play that game, but let me be the first to welcome you to reality! Edit: KoRMaK posted:It's an honor system sort of thing. I should still be estimating in good faith. Please stop focusing on this. I am already aware of the premise. If you decide that your self-perceived honor matters more than promotions or money... congratulations, you win something I guess? Double-edit: In fact, think of it as a test to see whether you are politically retarded or if you can manipulate the system in a tiny, inconsequential way to make yourself look good. baquerd fucked around with this message at 03:45 on Apr 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 03:39
|
|
|
KoRMaK posted:It's an honor system sort of thing. I should still be estimating in good faith. Please stop focusing on this. I am already aware of the premise. I'd like to get work to do the right thing first. "Digging feels good, so I'm going to keep doing it" 
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 03:42
|
|
|
I have hope, dammit! But also, yes I get it. I'm working on it. I also have faith in my manager because he has collaborated with me previously to make changes for the better, and we have a good working relationship because of his openness and our rapport. 
KoRMaK fucked around with this message at 03:55 on Apr 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 03:44
|
|
|
KoRMaK posted:I also have faith in my manager because he has collaborated with me previously to make changes for the better, and we have a good working relationship because of his openness and our rapport. You may want to ask yourself if your manager ended up looking good as a result of those changes, and whether they would look good fighting what is a metric presumably coming from their boss? And, if the metric isn't coming from above them, how good is your working relationship really that they haven't acknowledged your performance yet?
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 04:01
|
|
|
baquerd posted:You may want to ask yourself if your manager ended up looking good as a result of those changes, and whether they would look good fighting what is a metric presumably coming from their boss? And, if the metric isn't coming from above them, how good is your working relationship really that they haven't acknowledged your performance yet? I also have the opportunity to overhaul the metrics and start tracking other stuff. Before I do that though I have to find worth while stuff to track.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 04:07
|
|
|
KoRMaK posted:I have hope, dammit! So tell him "In what way aren't you incentivizing the team to high ball story estimates and low ball their velocity?" You can even keep it in vague "the team" when hopeful you mean "me"
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 04:10
|
|
|
KoRMaK posted:I also have the opportunity to overhaul the metrics and start tracking other stuff. Before I do that though I have to find worth while stuff to track. If you do happen across objective measures of developer performance that can clearly be measured in a quantitative manner, please let us all know. Personally, at least, I would be overjoyed to find such a thing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 04:12
|
|
|
If you aren't making your commitment consistently, there's no need to game the estimates. Just commit to less.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 12:29
|
|
|
Gounads posted:If you aren't making your commitment consistently, there's no need to game the estimates. Which will mean that that "high-risk" item that needs to be done won't ever get done. Who's the fool to commit to it?
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 13:08
|
|
|
Just be Agile guys, geez.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 13:14
|
|
|
Overheard recently: "We do one week sprints because it reduces churn"
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 13:53
|
|
|
Volguus posted:Which will mean that that "high-risk" item that needs to be done won't ever get done. Who's the fool to commit to it? You shouldn't commit to a high-risk item. You either (roughly) know how to do it or you don't. If you don't, first plan a spike or something.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 14:45
|
|
|
I'm so glad to be at a place that doesn't do Agile. We have our own issues (we don't do Agile or Waterfall, just kind of have projects), but at least we don't have: - Planning poker - Micromanagement thinly veiled as estimation meetings - Daily 30 minute meetings where everyone stares at their shoes in a circle and tries to tune out the 2-3 upbeat "morning" people - SCRUM consultants - Arguments over what constitutes an MVP - Union style "don't work too hard or you'll make our velocity too good" attitudes - Jargon
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 15:15
|
|
|
revmoo posted:- SCRUM consultants We have one of these and I cannot comprehend why we want to pay someone vast sums to read wikipedia articles to us.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 18:22
|
|
|
Infinotize posted:We have one of these and I cannot comprehend why we want to pay someone vast sums to read wikipedia articles to us. Seems like we are in the wrong business!
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 18:24
|
|
|
The only way I would accept another job at a place that employs a SCRUM consultant is if they're paying me to be a SCRUM consultant.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 18:32
|
|
|
revmoo posted:- Jargon If you don't have jargon, what do you have? 
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 18:46
|
|
|
HardDisk posted:If you don't have jargon, what do you have? Individuals and interactions over processes and tools 
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 18:49
|
|
|
revmoo posted:Individuals and interactions over processes and tools Sounds... Agile...
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 19:26
|
|
|
Infinotize posted:We have one of these and I cannot comprehend why we want to pay someone vast sums to read wikipedia articles to us. There are tons of companies doing Scrum wrong or half-assedly. Why pay anyone money when you can read Wikipedia yourself?
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 22:26
|
|
|
pigdog posted:There are tons of companies doing Scrum wrong or half-assedly. Why pay anyone money when you can read Wikipedia yourself? Because they trust consultants more than their employees. I work for a consulting agency and I see it all the time. About 75% of the time, I tell them to do what someone on the team is already saying they should do, but because it came from the mouth of A CONSULTANT, it's somehow more valid and correct.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 23:48
|
|
|
Ithaqua posted:Because they trust consultants more than their employees. I work for a consulting agency and I see it all the time. About 75% of the time, I tell them to do what someone on the team is already saying they should do, but because it came from the mouth of A CONSULTANT, it's somehow more valid and correct. When the consultant says it, it means the manager who hired the consultant gets credit.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2016 00:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 00:26 |
|
|
pigdog posted:There are tons of companies doing Scrum wrong or half-assedly. Why pay anyone money when you can read Wikipedia yourself? I've seen really great outcomes from scrum coaches. It's less about getting a team to do scrum "right" and more about getting layers of management above them to let them do it right. A lot of times the team doesn't have the leverage to push those changes up but management will listen to the consultant for some reason. This even includes things like changing how projects are budgeted for. The larger the company, the more value you'll get out of them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2016 14:25
|
|