[kibibu]

I agree with you. "Scrum is the new waterfall" is true in this case in that both have been built as total strawmen.

Scrum says nothing about unit tests, nor does it require sticking to the commitment (although it used to)

> I dont think they had a very good explanatory service

The most recent documentation on "Core" scrum is very simple and easy to parse.

[irix]

Yup, this guy sets up a total strawman which doesn't accurately describe how I've seen Scrum run at two major telecom software companies.

We change mid-sprint (when we need to), we don't have non-programmers running scrums or writing user stories and if you don't complete a story in a sprint then you roll it over to the next one.

If you have deadlines and contractual commitments to meet his suggestion of "use Kanban" strikes me as somewhat absurd. Running a team off of a Kanban board has its place (some of our support / platform teams use it) but I'm pretty sure your business owners want a better answer for when something is going to be delivered than 'when my Kanban board is empty'.

[jdbernard]

This isn't a straw man. This is exactly how Scrum gets implemented when management is running the process and not the development team.

[snow_mac]

+1

[snow_mac]

What it delivered soon? Put it in the top of the Kanban board and set a rule that the stuff in the top of the defined list gets worked first.