<?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: [Agile 2008] Estimating Considered Wasteful: Introducing Micro-Releases</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.dtsato.com/blog/2008/08/26/agile-2008-estimating-considered-wasteful-introducing-micro-releases/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.dtsato.com/blog/2008/08/26/agile-2008-estimating-considered-wasteful-introducing-micro-releases/</link>
	<description>We can change!</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 03 Mar 2010 17:58:50 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Danilo Sato</title>
		<link>http://www.dtsato.com/blog/2008/08/26/agile-2008-estimating-considered-wasteful-introducing-micro-releases/comment-page-1/#comment-1872</link>
		<dc:creator>Danilo Sato</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Nov 2008 18:07:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dtsato.com/blog/?p=139#comment-1872</guid>
		<description>You can adapt the approach to your needs, but the whole idea is that you don&#039;t have 3-6 months release cycles, but they ideally take less than a week (yes, less than an iteration). If you still want the long-term vision (3-6 months) you can do whatever is not-wasteful, but you still need to acknowledge that it&#039;s still a guesstimate. It&#039;s a different approach and I wouldn&#039;t recommend it to anyone who is still not used to the short cycles of an Agile approach and, as I said, this approach requires a very close collaboration with the customer.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You can adapt the approach to your needs, but the whole idea is that you don&#8217;t have 3-6 months release cycles, but they ideally take less than a week (yes, less than an iteration). If you still want the long-term vision (3-6 months) you can do whatever is not-wasteful, but you still need to acknowledge that it&#8217;s still a guesstimate. It&#8217;s a different approach and I wouldn&#8217;t recommend it to anyone who is still not used to the short cycles of an Agile approach and, as I said, this approach requires a very close collaboration with the customer.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bruno Miranda</title>
		<link>http://www.dtsato.com/blog/2008/08/26/agile-2008-estimating-considered-wasteful-introducing-micro-releases/comment-page-1/#comment-1871</link>
		<dc:creator>Bruno Miranda</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Nov 2008 17:46:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dtsato.com/blog/?p=139#comment-1871</guid>
		<description>The problem I see with this is that estimation is usually used to estimate the completion date of a Release, say a 3-6 month long release, which is too difficult to do on a gut-feel. Maybe the features should have estimation but the stories within them should not?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The problem I see with this is that estimation is usually used to estimate the completion date of a Release, say a 3-6 month long release, which is too difficult to do on a gut-feel. Maybe the features should have estimation but the stories within them should not?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
