<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: How To Share An Agile Development Team</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.allaboutagile.com/how-to-share-an-agile-development-team/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.allaboutagile.com/how-to-share-an-agile-development-team/</link>
	<description>Agile Development Made Easy!</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 19 May 2013 08:16:47 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrew Hedges</title>
		<link>http://www.allaboutagile.com/how-to-share-an-agile-development-team/#comment-145</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrew Hedges</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Nov 2007 01:44:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://allaboutagile.com/uncategorized/how-to-share-an-agile-development-team/#comment-145</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The way you describe in your post is roughly how we go about things, too. The problem we&#039;ve run into is how to determine the order that we work on the various stories. In our domain, we have stories against a legacy system that tends to blow out our time estimates from time to time. That means we occasionally have to drop less important stories off the bottom of our board. You don&#039;t mention an absolute ranking across backlogs, but would that be a solution to this issue in your eyes?  If not, how would you handle this?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The way you describe in your post is roughly how we go about things, too. The problem we&#8217;ve run into is how to determine the order that we work on the various stories. In our domain, we have stories against a legacy system that tends to blow out our time estimates from time to time. That means we occasionally have to drop less important stories off the bottom of our board. You don&#8217;t mention an absolute ranking across backlogs, but would that be a solution to this issue in your eyes?  If not, how would you handle this?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alexey</title>
		<link>http://www.allaboutagile.com/how-to-share-an-agile-development-team/#comment-80</link>
		<dc:creator>Alexey</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Jul 2007 17:14:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://allaboutagile.com/uncategorized/how-to-share-an-agile-development-team/#comment-80</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hi Kelly,&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt; Could not help to leave the comment as the topic is quite familiar to me. We tried to address the challenge of accurate iteration planning, when the same team members sharing their time between multiple products, in our Yoxel SW agile product management solution. Although in a slightly different manner.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt; In our case for each developer the tool allows you to set % of time he will be spending (or usually spends) on tasks from each product. This time sharing could look like 50% on ProductA, 30% on ProductB, and 20% on Other. Quite similar to what you&#039;re saying, right?&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt; Now when you start a planning session for your next iteration for ProductA the 50% factor is used to adjust perfect time estimates (entered by the developer) for his tasks. This way you actually get realistic estimate in the context of this particular product/iteration and time sharing scheme.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt; The same thing happens for ProductB, with 30% time spent on this product the realistic estimate will be that much longer than the perfect one. (9hr will become ~27hr)&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt; &#039;Other&#039; means time spent on critical or unplanned requests. You can think of it as 1-[person&#039;s individual velocity] :)&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt; Nice post, I am surprised I do not see this topic discussed anywhere else. From my experience this is a quite common situation when developers participate in multiple projects for different products.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;-Alexey]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Kelly,</p>
<p> Could not help to leave the comment as the topic is quite familiar to me. We tried to address the challenge of accurate iteration planning, when the same team members sharing their time between multiple products, in our Yoxel SW agile product management solution. Although in a slightly different manner.</p>
<p> In our case for each developer the tool allows you to set % of time he will be spending (or usually spends) on tasks from each product. This time sharing could look like 50% on ProductA, 30% on ProductB, and 20% on Other. Quite similar to what you&#8217;re saying, right?</p>
<p> Now when you start a planning session for your next iteration for ProductA the 50% factor is used to adjust perfect time estimates (entered by the developer) for his tasks. This way you actually get realistic estimate in the context of this particular product/iteration and time sharing scheme.</p>
<p> The same thing happens for ProductB, with 30% time spent on this product the realistic estimate will be that much longer than the perfect one. (9hr will become ~27hr)</p>
<p> &#8216;Other&#8217; means time spent on critical or unplanned requests. You can think of it as 1-[person's individual velocity] :)</p>
<p> Nice post, I am surprised I do not see this topic discussed anywhere else. From my experience this is a quite common situation when developers participate in multiple projects for different products.</p>
<p>-Alexey</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
