Over the last year, I’ve been helping (part-time) Freeset build their ecommerce website. David Hussman introduced me to folks from Freeset.

Following is a list of random topics (most of them are Agile/XP practices) about this project:

• Project Inception: We started off with a couple of meetings with folks from Freeset to understand their needs. David quickly created an initial vision document with User Personas and their use cases (about 2 page long on Google Docs). Naomi and John from Freeset, quickly created some screen mock-ups in Photoshop to show user interaction. I don’t think we spent more than a week on all of this. This helped us get started.
• Technology Choice: When we started we had to decide what platform are we going to use to build the site. We had to choose between customer site using Rails v/s using CMS. I think David was leaning towards RoR. I talked to folks at Directi (Sandeep, Jinesh, Latesh, etc) and we thought instead of building a custom website from scratch, we should use a CMS. After a bit of research, we settled on CMS Made Simple, for the following reasons
  • We needed different templates for different pages on the site.
  • PHP: Easiest to set up a PHP site with MySQL on any Shared Host Service Provider
• Planning: We started off with an hour long, bi-weekly planning meetings (conf calls on Skype) on every Saturday morning (India time). We had a massively distributed team. John was in New Zealand. David and Deborah (from BestBuy) were in US. Kerry was in UK for a short while. Naomi, Kelsea and other were in Kolkatta and I was based out of Mumbai. Because of the time zone difference and because we’re all working on this part time, the whole bi-weekly planning meeting felt awkward and heavy weight. So after about 3 such meetings we abandoned it. We created a spreadsheet on Google Docs, added all the items that had high priority and started signing up for tasks. Whenever anyone updated an item on the sheet, everyone would be notified about the change.
• User Stories: We started off with User Persona and Stories, but soon we just fell back to simple tasks on a shared spreadsheet. We had quite a few user related tasks, but just one liner in the spread sheet was more than sufficient. We used this spreadsheet as a sudo-backlog. (by no means we had the rigor to try and build a proper backlog).
• Short Releases: We (were) only working on production environment. Every change made by a developer was immediately live. Only recently we created a development environment (replica of production), on which we do all our development. (I asked John from Freeset, if this change helped him, he had mixed feelings. Recently he did a large website restructuring (added some new section and moved some pages around), and he found the development environment useful for that. But for other things, when he wants to make some small changes, he finds it an over kill to make changes to dev and then sync it up with production. There are also things like news, which makes sense to do on the production server. Now he has to do in both places). So I’m thinking may be, we move back to just production environment and then create a prod on demand if we are plan to make big changes.
• Testing: Original we had plans of at least recording or scripting some Selenium tests to make sure the site is behaving the way we expected it to. This kind of took a back seat and never really became an issue. Recently we had a slight set back when we moved a whole bunch of pages around and their link from other parts of the site were broken. Other than that, so far, its just been fine.
• Evolutionary Design: Always believed in and continue to believe in “Do the Simplest, Dumbest, thing that could Possibly work“. Since we started, the project had taken interesting turns, we used quite a lot of different JavaScript libraries, hacked a bit of PHP code here and there. All of this is evolving and is working fine.
• Usability: We still have lots of usability and optimization issues on our site. Since we don’t have an expert with us and we can’t afford one, we are doing the best we can with what we have on hand. We are hoping we’ll find a volunteer some day soon to help us on this front.
• Versioning: We explored various options for versioning, but as of today we don’t have any repository under which we version our site (content and code). This is a drawback of using an online CMS. Having said that so far (been over a year), we did not really find the need for versioning. As of now we have 4 people working on this site and it just seems to work fine. Reminds me of YAGNI. (May be in future when we have more collaborators, we might need this).
• Continuous Integration: With out Versioning and Testing, CI is out of question.
• Automated Deployment: Until recently we only had one server (production) so there was no need for deployment. Since now we have a dev and a prod environment, Devdas and I quickly hacked a simple shell scrip (with mysqldump & rsync) that does automated deployment. It can’t get simpler than this.
• Hosting: We talked about hosting the site on its own slice v/s using an existing shared host account. We could always move the site to another location when our existing, cheap hosting option will not suit our needs. So as of today, I’m hosting the site under one of my shared host account.
• Rich Media Content: We questioned serving & hosting rich media content like videos from our site or using YouTube to host them. We went with YouTube for the following reasons
  • We wanted to redirect any possible traffic to other sites which are more tuned to catering high bandwidth content
  • We wanted to use YouTube’s existing customer base to attract traffic to our site
  • Since we knew we’ll be moving to another hosting service, we did not want to keep all those videos on the server which then will have to be moved to the new server
• Customer Feedback: So far we have received great feedback from users of this site. We’ve also seen a huge growth in traffic to our site. Currently hovering around 1500 hits per day. Other than getting feedback from users. We also look at Google Analytics to see how users are responding to changes we’ve made and so on.
• We don’t really have/need a System Metaphor and we are not paying as much attention to refactoring. We have some light conventions but we don’t really have any coding standards. Nor do we have the luxury to pair program.
• Distributed/Virtual Team: Since all of us are distributed and traveling, we don’t really have the concept of site. Forget on-site customer or product owner.
• Since all of this is voluntary work, Sustainable pace takes a very different meaning. Sometimes what we do is not sustainable, but that’s the need of the hour. However all of us really like and want to work on this project. We have a sense of ownership. (collective ownership)
• We’ve never really sat down and done a retrospective. May be once in a while we ask a couple of questions regarding how something were going.

Overall, I’ve been extremely happy with the choices we’ve made. I’m not suggesting every project should be run this way. I’m trying to highlight an example of what being agile really means.

These days, its common to see teams doing the Product Backlog Management to Sprint Planning t0 Daily Scrums to Reviews to Retrospectives perfectly fine, as described in the book (or the 2 days Certified Scrum Master course). We are doing all the process stuff correctly, except that we don’t seem to be”actually” making money (minting). But somehow along the way, we seemed to have missed the point.

The problem I see is, teams are doing all the process stuff, as they are told, except that, post demo they don’t actually release the software (deploy it into production). Most teams are very happy showing the demos at the end of the sprints. They start thinking that this new process they are following is magical. Until 6 months later, their so-called “Product Owner” comes backs saying I didn’t quite expect “this” this-way and I thought “that” would be “this” and not really “that”. That is when it hits the team that what they were really doing was building inventory and basically doing a compressed-waterfall.

Until you actually release your software and see your end-users actually use it in real life, you don’t have the most important feedback. Hence you are not “done” until you really see you users use the feature you just released (and probably you are not even done after that. “Done-Done” was a cute concept, get over it). There is no better means of feedback nor is there a better risk-reduction strategy other than releasing software to production frequently (at least every week).

Remember code that is not yet deploy and just sitting in your repository is a liability. So is, all your fancy product backlogs and grandiose plans.

It is important to understand what a retrospective is and why we need one before we jump into antipatterns.

Based on my experience, I can think of the following antipatterns with regard to retrospectives:

• Reoccurring problems:
  If you see the same problems repeated over and over again in each retrospective, you might have missed the most important, learning aspect of a retrospective.
  Maintaining a history of previous retrospective can help as the first step. Retrospectives must be seen as a chain rather than a bunch of independent nodes. Capturing the discussion and letting the whole team follow up on the action items can be really help. Avoid one person taking the ownership of the whole retrospective.
• Retrospectives as a way of reporting to senior management:
  Trying to capture information in retrospectives purely to report to senior management is a big smell. Retrospectives are, by the people, for the people and of the people. The focus is people and the process around them, not the senior management. Certainly, notes from the retrospective can help senior management. But retrospective is not meant for purely that purpose.
• Dull Retrospectives [Not enough humor and openness]:
  Retrospectives with low energy levels, where the participants sit like rocks, expression less, scare me. Though retrospectives are a serious affair, they must be fun filled, enjoyable learning experience. The team should feel comfortable expressing their opinions. Monotonous format of a retrospective can make retrospectives an event instead of a regular practice.
• Retrospectives turning into bitch session:
  If all one does during a retrospective is complain, complain and complain, it does not feel right. The team has to brainstorming and coming up with potential solutions to their problems rather than just bitching. One must utilize the retrospectives to do some root cause analysis and come up with action points.
• Time boxed retrospectives:
  You should let the retrospective run as long as the team wants or have more frequent retrospectives. Retrospectives are important, intense discussions which involve a lot of brainstorming and creative thinking. When I enter a time boxed retrospective, I don‘t feel free to discuss a lot of issues, coz I think they can be very time consuming. So I‘m forced to wait for the volcano of frustration erupts in a wrong place at a wrong time.
• No action items/resolutions:
  At the end of each retrospective the team must come up with a list of action items. In the coming iteration/sprint, the team makes sure those action items are resolved or discussed further. But not coming up with unanimous action items defeats the purpose of a retrospective.
• Lack of respect for ground rules:
  Retrospectives have very simple ground rules. If one does not care about these rules, it means to me that they do not care or respect the team members.
• Retrospectives optional to team members
  Team members skipping retrospectives is a big project smell. Even if someone is not interested/willing to speak, they can still listen to other team member‘s perspectives. The only reason I might not attend a retrospective is, when I have lost hope. And that‘s a big problem.
• Formal structure for retrospectives
  If the teams are asked to fill out a form at the end of a retrospective, you might just a missed the forest for a tree. Any kind of formalization around self organized events is a big smell. The event losses its essence with formalization.