Brian Marick

Wrap-up

Written by Andy Tinkham. Date of post: . 1 Comment Posted in Automated Testing, Conference Reports, Development, Testing Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , 1 Comment

Cem prepared this list to help us discuss the outcome of this workshop. We spent this morning discussing and refining it (with John moderating, which I mention so that he can get his Toastmaster’s credit 🙂 ). All of these things are in the context of testing on an agile project, where people typically shift […]

Guest post from James Bach

Written by Andy Tinkham. Date of post: . Posted in Conference Reports, Development, Testing Tagged , , , , , , ,

One of the things that I (Andy) don’t feel like I conveyed well in this blog is some of the conflict that came out in our discussions. I think my failure in this regard stemmed from two pieces — the conflict aversion I described a few posts back, and the fact that this was a […]

Dinner conversations

Written by Andy Tinkham. Date of post: . Posted in Business Analysis, Conference Reports, Testing Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

A few tidbits from dinner conversations: First, a couple of nights ago, Bret was talking about psychological barriers that hold us back. The example he gave was that maybe he wasn’t as successful as a developer because he didn’t want to redesign people’s code. This got me to pondering. I’m generally prone to avoid controversy. […]

More observations

Written by Andy Tinkham. Date of post: . Posted in Conference Reports Tagged , , , , , ,

* Brian observed that it was interesting pairing because it seemed that at any given moment he wasn’t as confident in the code and his understanding of the code as it has historically been on his own (but as long as the sum total of confidence was ok, he was ok with that). He attributed […]

Day 3 wrap-up

Written by Andy Tinkham. Date of post: . Posted in Conference Reports Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

You may have noticed that I’m blogging less and less on each day. Some of this is because the planning and procedural stuff is becoming less emphasized as we work more on getting a story done. While I could say “we wrote code” it doesn’t seem the same to me in terms of what I […]

Full group retrospective

Written by Andy Tinkham. Date of post: . Posted in Conference Reports, Testing Tagged , , , , , ,

The blog team is using Bret as customer. RubLog is a combination of a CGI, a template, a document repository, and a URL that returns one HTML output. They’ve created a harness that copies the files for one blog (from multiple ones) to the places, then visits the URLs and detects chages. They prevent date/time […]

Day 2 Group Retrospective

Written by Andy Tinkham. Date of post: . Posted in Conference Reports Tagged , , ,

We split up into 3 sets of pairs (actually 2 pairs and a triple) to focus on three tasks: An acceptance testing framework (using the DOM) Conversion of data from word doc into usable stuff Developing an initial page that displays the case information After spending the time to do the development, here’s where we […]

Iteration #1

Written by Andy Tinkham. Date of post: . 2 Comments Posted in Conference Reports Tagged , , , , , , , , , 2 Comments

This afternoon was spent doing iteration 1. Our initial task list was: Get people up to speed on RubyFIT Determine how to run FIT from within Eclipse Perform a spike to determine feasibility of using the cgi library (through Apache) Perform a spike to determine feasibility of using a basic built-in Ruby server Determine how […]

Estimation

Written by Andy Tinkham. Date of post: . Posted in Conference Reports Tagged , , , , , , , ,

We talked about how we were going to estimate the various stories. We decided to do estimates in stream half-days (one or two people (since there’s 7 of us – Bill, Brian, Lisa, Chris, Mike H., BC, and myself). Working down the stories in the last post, we came up with the following estimates. One […]