Rob Smyth

Tuesday, 27 January 2009

To Revert Is Right To 'Go-on' Is To Look Good

As people come onto a team using continuous integration (CI) we usually hear:
  • 'I cannot commit as there are too many changes. (Has not committed changes as done)'

  • 'I cannot commit as I have conflicts. (Has not updated frequently)'
It is a learning curve, and usally works out. But now a new guys gave some great feedback (in my words as I do remember the exact quote):
The thing I have taken on is that reverting my changes enables me to deliver faster.
So true. But I notice that when somebody says at stand-up that they did X hours and then reverted all changes, it is often seen as a failure. An intereting reflection on time to deliver working code to measured effort/behaviour/complexity/expired time/working. I think we have another dimension to software development about measuring success.

Words seem to lead us. 'Perfromance' is about an act, delivery of working functionality in minimal time is about efficiency. Would we be better off talking about efficency than perfromance?