|
|
|
|
|
|
by UK-Al05
2971 days ago
|
|
|
Secruirity as formal requirements analysis is often awful anyway. Often just a checkbox exercise. It won't having good engineers who understand secrurity. Who emdedd it in everything they do. Yes it is agile. This is what exactly what it means by collaboration in the agile manifesto. Hackathons have been brilliantly successful for companies exploring new solutions for problems. Why do you think they are so popular? |
|
|
http://agilemanifesto.org/history.html "The Agile movement is not anti-methodology.." Agile is not about hacking, and the manifesto is not about replacement of one with the other, but about the balance of how you adopt them.
Formal requirements analysis might be too much process, but then on a financial system, it would likely warrant a necessity on accountability requirements put in place by regulators. Looser story mapping alone might be an appropriate balance for a Beer Catalog.
I'm not a fan of a agile, but can we stop recharacterising it as not doing process.
*Not a fan: Having a 3 month support ticket, with multi-level signoff, 100% test coverage, cost codes and invoices per change is a bit much for text change on a website, so Agile does help solve a problem that really does exist in places. But is individual and interactions before process appropriate on medical systems? Agile may fit somewhere in the middle ground (between computer games and nuclear control systems), but it is definitely not a catch all for appropriate ways to work, especially in high risk environments.