[Robin_Message]

Three of the four agile principles from the manifesto are:

Working software over comprehensive documentation

Customer collaboration over contract negotiation

Responding to change over following a plan

All of those strongly point towards continuous delivery being part of agile. Continuous delivery is also a given in XP, one of (if not the) founding agile methodology.

I think you need to dilute agile quite a lot to release once a year, although I daresay you can.

[p4wnc6]

See my other comment [0].

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12088793

It's amusing to me that the first thing people thought to do was go look up the letter of the Agile law, as if that could possibly have any bearing on this. Such a strong indication of what an empty cult Agile really is.

[Robin_Message]

I don't understand. The principles of agile are, to me, what agile is, not the cultish methodologies.

How would you define agile?

From your other comment, it seems like you're defining it as whatever is appropriate for the project. I don't disagree with that sentiment at all, but it does make the word rather pointless.

[p4wnc6]

> How would you define agile?

It's defined by whatever practices emerge through its usage. Which ends up being a big stew of political dysfunction, time-wasting meetings, and pointless metrics.

I feel it is a classic No True Scotsman fallacy to say that "any real agile implementation" does this or that, but all of these "false" Agile implementations lead to the dysfunction.