Let’s review "reversible raincoat tests." Sometimes, we build systems in which a downstream collaborator must interface with an upstream one. The two apps are by separate teams, on separate servers, developed at separate times, and still both in development. A reversible raincoat test is a script with two sides. Think in terms of a literal […]
Reversible Raincoat Tests Read More »
Yesterday I mused about explanation privileging, where one always reaches for one ring to rule them all in their explanations of behavior. This morning I am thinking about the reasons that happens. Don’t be alarmed, i’m not gonna suggest there’s just one reason for it every time it happens, i’m circular, every argument is circular,
On One Ring To Rule Them All? Read More »
Still feeling it, so, a sidebar on choosing which coaching stories to work… I was raised in XP, and as such, I imbibed the concept of "most important story" heavily. When I’d show up at these shops, I’d be replete with the wonder of myself, and I’d look out on the horizon of broken things,
Choosing A Coaching Story To Work Read More »
I’m thinking of this thing called "justifcation privileging," or alternatively "explanation monism". Or even, short hand and jokily, "one ring to rule them all." One constantly sees tweets, blogs, even books, where someone boils down staggeringly complex and ill-understood processes to one factor. Today I saw "people don’t make decisions rationally, they make them emotionally."
Why Do We Seek One Ring To Rule Them All? Read More »
I can’t over-emphasize for new coaches the importance of rampant opportunism. Until you’ve established your miracle powers in a team, you won’t be able to move big levers, only small ones. Which small levers will bring you the biggest bang of trust & faith the fastest? Some possible openings: we find a bug that’s an
The First Coaching Days Read More »
Shifting certainties. This is where i’m headed these days. Without belaboring criticism, what i’m seeing is that we have a trade with a whole stack of roles and humans to fill them, and, of necessity, they have assembled a varied, sometimes compatible sometimes not, set of certainties by which they navigate. The trouble is that,
Shifting Certainties Read More »
Refactoring in testless code is hard. It’s the perfect demonstration of the manglish "agency" of code. It is simply not possible to change testless code and guarantee you’ve done no damage. It’s one of the most delicate operations geeks do. There are principles, yes. There are tricksy techniques, too. But mostly, there is experience &
Refactoring Testless Code Read More »
These wrangles over system seem mis-focused. Moreover, they seem part of the surface of the elephant i’ve been trying to describe. A system is inherently an abstraction. It compresses, filters, selects, features from an experienced reality. We formulate systems for at least 3 reasons. First, so we can establish commonality. That is, we can use
How I Don’t Apply XP, or Scrum, or Anything Read More »
My intent in writing a test is to satisfy myself by the cheapest means possible that the code does exactly what I think it does. I stress that this is my intent. Believe me, fifteen minutes on the internet will reveal to you a barrage of other possible intents. Surely, by now, it will be
Why I Write A Test Read More »
Dear smart geeks: stop worrying so much about whether you’re gonna get it wrong, you definitely are gonna get it wrong. How do I approach this? Hmmmm. Okay, I see a couple of threads that need to be pulled together. This one’s gonna be clunky, I fear. Ahhh well. I’m definitely gonna get it wrong,
You’re Gonna Be Wrong Read More »
