<?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: Lean Principle #2 – Build Quality In</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.allaboutagile.com/lean-principles-2-build-quality-in/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.allaboutagile.com/lean-principles-2-build-quality-in/</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: Ryan Platte</title>
		<link>http://www.allaboutagile.com/lean-principles-2-build-quality-in/#comment-388080</link>
		<dc:creator>Ryan Platte</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 May 2013 14:06:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.allaboutagile.com/lean-principles-2-build-quality-in/#comment-388080</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Refactoring as a regular part of software development keeps design quality high with near-zero inventory of design problems. As features are added, subtle design defects begin to evidence themselves. Developers practiced in continuous refactoring notice these &quot;code smells&quot; and address them inexpensively at the earliest possible moment. Your reference to refactoring seems to assume it&#039;s long after the fact, which would indeed impede flow. XP advocated it as a continuous activity, the inexpensive JIT &quot;middle way&quot; between keeping an inventory of design up front (design before development) and winding up with an inventory of technical debt (design after development).]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Refactoring as a regular part of software development keeps design quality high with near-zero inventory of design problems. As features are added, subtle design defects begin to evidence themselves. Developers practiced in continuous refactoring notice these &#8220;code smells&#8221; and address them inexpensively at the earliest possible moment. Your reference to refactoring seems to assume it&#8217;s long after the fact, which would indeed impede flow. XP advocated it as a continuous activity, the inexpensive JIT &#8220;middle way&#8221; between keeping an inventory of design up front (design before development) and winding up with an inventory of technical debt (design after development).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Casey</title>
		<link>http://www.allaboutagile.com/lean-principles-2-build-quality-in/#comment-14320</link>
		<dc:creator>Casey</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 Jul 2011 22:30:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.allaboutagile.com/lean-principles-2-build-quality-in/#comment-14320</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I love it.  Develop fast, but you have to build quality products.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I love it.  Develop fast, but you have to build quality products.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: seo melbourne</title>
		<link>http://www.allaboutagile.com/lean-principles-2-build-quality-in/#comment-895</link>
		<dc:creator>seo melbourne</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Nov 2010 04:34:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.allaboutagile.com/lean-principles-2-build-quality-in/#comment-895</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Very nice article but i like mostly Agile development methods also encourage automated regression testing.but there are present time variouse technology.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Very nice article but i like mostly Agile development methods also encourage automated regression testing.but there are present time variouse technology.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: miniclip</title>
		<link>http://www.allaboutagile.com/lean-principles-2-build-quality-in/#comment-879</link>
		<dc:creator>miniclip</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 19 Sep 2010 20:48:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.allaboutagile.com/lean-principles-2-build-quality-in/#comment-879</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[really awesome article i didint think that way but how about xp addiction..]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>really awesome article i didint think that way but how about xp addiction..</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: kev</title>
		<link>http://www.allaboutagile.com/lean-principles-2-build-quality-in/#comment-878</link>
		<dc:creator>kev</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Sep 2010 22:03:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.allaboutagile.com/lean-principles-2-build-quality-in/#comment-878</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[re: reasons for paired programming - the primary reason/goal I believe is to allow you to deliver value early and often to your customer. People(developers, testers etc) who accept and adopt pairing will undoubtedly produce higher quality work which in turn will lead to an increase in capability/velocity. I actually pair not only on programming but on emails, on support documents, etc etc as in my experience quality is increased.&lt;br /&gt;Another reason is doing XP/Scrum (not scrumbut) is hard and two heads are better than one...especially when you first start trying TDD..try it and measure your velocity over a couple of sprints and make your own mind up.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>re: reasons for paired programming &#8211; the primary reason/goal I believe is to allow you to deliver value early and often to your customer. People(developers, testers etc) who accept and adopt pairing will undoubtedly produce higher quality work which in turn will lead to an increase in capability/velocity. I actually pair not only on programming but on emails, on support documents, etc etc as in my experience quality is increased.<br />Another reason is doing XP/Scrum (not scrumbut) is hard and two heads are better than one&#8230;especially when you first start trying TDD..try it and measure your velocity over a couple of sprints and make your own mind up.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: kev</title>
		<link>http://www.allaboutagile.com/lean-principles-2-build-quality-in/#comment-877</link>
		<dc:creator>kev</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Sep 2010 21:56:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.allaboutagile.com/lean-principles-2-build-quality-in/#comment-877</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Great article, I wholeheartedly agree, In my opinion quality is the key to increasing your velocity sustainably, most teams that I observe that struggle to do scrum seem to be affected by the lack of being able to apply the XP disciplines that focus on quality, pairing, tdd, done done..you have to make sure quality is happening right from the start and that it is continually improved, letting quality go by dropping the disciplines leads to legacy problems.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great article, I wholeheartedly agree, In my opinion quality is the key to increasing your velocity sustainably, most teams that I observe that struggle to do scrum seem to be affected by the lack of being able to apply the XP disciplines that focus on quality, pairing, tdd, done done..you have to make sure quality is happening right from the start and that it is continually improved, letting quality go by dropping the disciplines leads to legacy problems.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter Saddington</title>
		<link>http://www.allaboutagile.com/lean-principles-2-build-quality-in/#comment-876</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter Saddington</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Sep 2010 11:38:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.allaboutagile.com/lean-principles-2-build-quality-in/#comment-876</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Great article. Wondering if you could elaborate a little more on great reasons for paired programming. Some clients are interested, but have a hard time making the jump! What are the biggest factors?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great article. Wondering if you could elaborate a little more on great reasons for paired programming. Some clients are interested, but have a hard time making the jump! What are the biggest factors?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
