Skip to main content

Agile Lean Europe: Some thoughts

Just jotting down some thoughts..

A couple of weeks ago, I drove up to Düsseldorf to attend the Scrumtisch Rhein/Ruhr meeting, because the topic was this new Agile/Lean Europe (ALE) Network. Olaf Lewitz facilitated the discussion ( credits to CodeCentric for the free beverages/food).

I first heard about this network in this discussion in the Norwegian agile forum, initiated by Sergey Dmitriev and followed up on by Johannes Brodwall.

Olaf and Deborah Preuss were both involved in the Agile Coach Camp in Norway earlier this year, and I suspect that they already discussed some of these things there. This makes for a firm connection between the German and Norwegian agile scene, and I hope to be able to support this bridge somehow.

Now, why does this European interconnection matter anyway? 
I'll give you three reasons why it matters to me personally:

1) It's no fun doing it aloneAgile is deeply nested with social drive. While it's perfectly fine to drive on the social forces within a closed community (say, the German agile scene), it gets a lot more interesting if we know that this is an international effort. Knowing that other countries are interested adds motivation.

2) A mirror for our culture
We make changes based on feedback and inspection. For the sake of fresh perspectives, we often use externals (consultants, coaches) for gaining insight. Agile depends heavily on, and influences, culture. Ergo, for a fresh perspective, we might benefit from using externals from other cultures/countries.

(One thing is organizations of business, another thing is getting feedback on how our communities are operating.)

3) Synergy, or re-using knowledge and experience in other countries
If I spent hundreds of hours creating some crystallized knowledge on how to deal with some particular problem (like introducing agile in public sector), it would be an awful shame if it only came to the benefit of the few thousand potentially interested in my country. Letting other countries benefit from the same knowledge is win/win.

A few thoughts on Germany/Norway in particular

There are limits to how much we can absorb from American (and even British) experience reports. Germany and Norway are both social-security oriented economies, with conservative innovation habits, well on the way into privatizing a bunch of former national institutions (rail, telecom, post/logistics, health).

So we have a lot of things in common. And if I may say, people are very similar in regards to personality and behavior (the way we eat, drink, talk, politeness, etc.). But Norway is tiny and Germany is huge, which makes Norway a bit like a miniature test-lab for Germany. What works on in Norway could work in Germany on a larger scale.

To name one example: The traditional rejection of agile projects in Norway's public sector projects was overcome some few years ago by (among other things) the creation of an agile contract standard, the PS2000 agile. Since then, several successful projects have made use of this contract, both in public and private sector.

Is this a lesson we could port to Germany somehow?

Also check out Kurt Häusler's thoughts in this post and Olaf Lewitz's summary from the Düsseldorf meeting. Both of them, as well as Johannes Brodwall are attending the ALE Network events at the XP Madrid conference in a couple of weeks.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Git-SVN Mirror without the annoying update-ref

This post is part of  a series on Git and Subversion . To see all the related posts, screencasts and other resources, please  click here .  So no sooner than I had done my git-svn presentation at JavaZone , I got word of a slightly different Git-SVN mirror setup that makes it a bit easier to work with: In short, my old recipe includes an annoying git update-ref step to keep the git-svn remote reference up to date with the central bare git repo. This new recipe avoids this, so we can simply use git svn dcommit   directly. So, longer version, with the details. My original recipe is laid out in five steps: Clone a fresh Git repo from Subversion. This will be our  fetching repo. Set up a  bare repo. Configure pushing from the fetching repo to bare repo In the shoes of a developer, clone the repo Set up an SVN remote in the developer's repo In the new approach, we redefine those last two steps: (See the original post for how to do the fir...

Git Stash Blooper (Could not restore untracked files from stash)

The other day I accidentally did a git stash -a , which means it stashes *everything*, including ignored output files (target, build, classes, etc). Ooooops.. What I meant to do was git stash -u , meaning stash modifications plus untracked new files. Anyhows, I ended up with a big fat stash I couldn't get back out. Each time I tried, I got something like this: .../target/temp/dozer.jar already exists, no checkout .../target/temp/core.jar already exists, no checkout .../target/temp/joda-time.jar already exists, no checkout .../target/foo.war already exists, no checkout Could not restore untracked files from stash No matter how I tried checking out different revisions (like the one where I actually made the stash), or using --force, I got the same error. Now these were one of those "keep cool for a second, there's a git way to fix this"situation. I figured: A stash is basically a commit. If we look at my recent commits using   git log --graph --...

Git-SVN Mirror for multiple branches

This post is part of  a series on Git and Subversion . To see all the related posts, screencasts and other resources, please  click here .  This extends the posts where I explained how to set up a git-svn mirror for a single directory. NOTE: If you just want to use Git against a SVN repo on your own, stop reading ,now, and stick to the git-svn basics. However, if you want a setup where you can share a Git repository with colleagues and friends while still interfacing with Subversion, keep reading. I'll show how to set up a git-svn mirror for a standard Subversion project with trunk , branches and tags . It's a bit like the single directory mirror, but in order to keep all branches in sync, it's a bit more fiddling. The good part is that this setup enables us to cherry-pick commits from one branch to the other. This is slightly smoother than using svn merge . First of all, let's repeat how our Subversion and Git-repositories look physically (roughly the sa...

Git tools for keeping patches on top of moving upstreams

At work, we maintain patches for some pretty large open source repositories that regularly release new versions, forcing us to update our patches to match. So far, we've been using basic Git operations to transplant our modifications from one major version of the upstream to the next. Every time we make such a transplant, we simply squash together the modifications we made in the previous version, and land it as one big commit into the next version. Those who are used to very stringent keeping of Git history may wrinkle their nose at this, but it is a pragmatic choice. Maintaining modifications on top of the rapidly changing upstream is a lot of work, and so far we haven't had the opportunity to figure out a more clever way to do it. Nor have we really suffered any consequences of not having an easy to read history of our modifications - it's a relatively small amount of patches, after all. With a recent boost in team size, we may have that opportunity. Also the need for be...

The Dream of a Bi-directional Git-SVN mirror

This post is part of  a series on Git and Subversion . To see all the related posts, screencasts and other resources, please  click here .  I just got an email asking me how one can set up a bi-directional Git-SVN mirror. It ended up being quite a long answer, so I'll post it here for the benefit of other Git-SVN readers with the same idea. As you may know, I'm a proponent of my own Git-SVN setup . I remember trying to go down the path of a bi-directional repository, but always ran into problems. Here is how it could work: However nice this would be to have, it can be very hard to achieve in practice: Git-svn requires working in a non-bare repository, so pushing to it is by default refused. You can work around this by doing this in the target sync repo: git config receive.denyCurrentBranch ignore You also have to automatically perform a git reset --hard in the syncing repo after each push (by some git hook?), because the work-dir is c...