Month: September 2020

Change Harvesters Take Change

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, white supremacy, vast inequality, & the oppression of women. Stay safe. Stay strong. Stay angry. Stay kind. In change-harvesting, we use this word "taken" in …

Change Harvesters Take Change Go to Post »

Change Harvesters Orient Their Changes

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 who are working so hard for peaceful change in the US. Black lives matter to me, and I greatly appreciate your effort and risk. Stay …

Change Harvesters Orient Their Changes Go to Post »

Real Programming S01E04: Into The Frying Domain!

This entry is part 4 of 4 in the series Real Programming

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 where the slogan is still a work in progress. Last time, we had our view and our model and I remarked that that was two …

Real Programming S01E04: Into The Frying Domain! Go to Post »

Change Harvesting Makes Local Changes

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. But those other concerns are far more important. Black lives matter. Please help me support and empower this movement for equity and peace. Stay safe, …

Change Harvesting Makes Local Changes Go to Post »

Change Harvesting Emphasizes The Human

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 risking life & limb in the face of armed violence every day. Stay safe, stay strong, stay angry, stay kind. Black Lives Matter. When we …

Change Harvesting Emphasizes The Human Go to Post »

The Cost of Rework Avoidance Theory

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 safe, stay strong, stay angry, stay kind. We can change this. We’re the only thing that can. The most essential aspect of the RAT (Rework …

The Cost of Rework Avoidance Theory Go to Post »

CHT Means Different Design Imperatives

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 man carrying a long gun he has just used to kill people. Stay safe. Stay strong. Stay kind. Stay angry. Help us change this. Black …

CHT Means Different Design Imperatives Go to Post »

Human-less Change Fails

  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 is kind of a sideshow to me right now. Changing the world out on the streets is the real story. Black lives matter. Please go …

Human-less Change Fails Go to Post »

CHT-Style Implementation

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 implementation part of the two models, they have much in common, with the key difference being the highly iterative nature of CHT’s approach. If we …

CHT-Style Implementation Go to Post »

Scroll to Top