We’re talking about change-harvesting: human, local, oriented, taken, and iterative change. Let’s consider this adjective "taken" today, and see where we go with it. I keep saying: these muses are respite for me, and maybe for you, from more important stories. Partisan thugs seek to turn our nation into a freak show of state violence, […]
Change Harvesters Take Change Read More »
In our change-harvesting take, we have human, local, oriented, taken, and iterative as our attributes of successful change strategy. Let’s take up oriented: How do we reconcile our emphasis on locality against the far-away target that is our goal? Before we begin, I want to reiterate my support for those folks out in the world
Change Harvesters Orient Their Changes Read More »
Real Programming S01E04: Into the Frying Domain! We have two parts of our walking skeleton, the View and the Model. This time we’ll move a tiny amount of work into the domain classes If you want to follow along in the code, the project is https://github.com/geepawhill/yz Welcome to episode four of Real Programming, the show
Real Programming S01E04: Into The Frying Domain! Read More »
We change-harvesters say human, local, oriented, taken, and iterative. We talked about human a couple of day ago, let’s take on local. A quick sketch of the idea, and a couple of cases will do, yeah? Previous Post: Change-Harvesting Emphasizes the Human I write about geekery as a kind of comforting respite from other concerns.
Change Harvesting Makes Local Changes Read More »
Human, local, oriented, taken, and iterative: this is how change-harvesting in software development approaches change in most contexts in the trade. Let’s take "human" today, and see where it leads us. Before we begin, I want to express my continued support for the protestors. They’re still out there, folks, still peaceably seeking change, and still
Change Harvesting Emphasizes The Human Read More »
To make the case for Change Harvesting as an approach, it’s important to understand that the cost of Rework Avoidance Theory isn’t imaginary or subtle, but both concrete & quite high. Geekery’s not the most important story for me right now, it’s really just comfort food. Rest, but don’t get distracted. Black lives matter. Stay
The Cost of Rework Avoidance Theory Read More »
Change-harvesting software design centers "online" brownfield development: change-centric thinking. Most older sets of design imperatives are based in "offline" greenfield development: build-centric thinking. The differences can — and should — lead to design disagreements. This week, regular like clockwork, we shoot yet another unarmed Black man in the back, and we quietly arrest a white
CHT Means Different Design Imperatives Read More »
A lot of the reasons that change fails, inside & outside technical organizations, come down to one broad statement: the people who have to make the changes are humans, and the people who want them to make the changes have not successfully taken this into account. Before we proceed: Changing a software development process
Human-less Change Fails Read More »
When we did our compare & contrast of the working models underpinned by Change-Harvesting theory (CHT) vs Rework Avoidance Theory (RAT), we temporarily sidestepped the specific differences of the implementation part. Let’s drill in on that today. Read the first post here: Change Harvesting vs Rework Avoidance It was quite a sidestep: other than the
CHT-Style Implementation Read More »
