Talk:Extreme programming practices

message: The reference to Extreme Programming Explained most likely is meant to be to the first edition of the book. The second edition contains practices which differ immensely from the list mentioned on this page. Also, in the second edition (seventh printing), page 54 is blank. Note that I have not edited the article, because I cannot confirm the practices originated from the first edition of the book.
David Walschots (talk) 16:21, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Beck Reference 

message: I know that the risk analysis here is just an example, and everyone views this differently. But, according to this example, developers develop the relatively complete, unchanging and simple stories before the complete, unchanging and complex stories. Isn't it a better practice to do the complex stuff first? Or is it completely subjective? DRogers 14:38, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You actually need to do both first: the easy ones to demonstrate progress and build trust in your delivery capability, the high risk ones to fail fast, understand the problem better and gradually improve predictability 2A02:A46F:F253:1:A8A6:94D3:DDC7:432 (talk) 11:47, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Risk 

message: Surely this should be at Extreme Programming practices, i.e. practices in Extreme Programming rather than the current title, which suggests extreme practices in Computer programming?--Michig (talk) 14:29, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title 

message: The planning game details for XP don't make sense to me and aren't referenced. I think a reference should be provided. The exploration, commitment, steering for iterations suggests that part of the iteration planning game means actually completing the tasks - I've not heard concept that the planning phase extends for the entire iteration before ChanochWiggers (talk) 19:25, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Planning Games 

message: "Extreme programming (XP) is a POPULAR agile software development" 
I am removing "popular" because it is not defined or sourced (either in the lead or elsewhere in the article). Personally, I think the claim is dubious, but of course reliable sources could easily sway me. ;) Note that the Extreme Programming page itself does not make the claim of popularity. 173.172.95.186 (talk) 14:12, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Popular? 

message: 1) Within XP, the "customer" is not the one who pays the bill, but the one who really uses the system. XP says that the customer should be on hand at all times and available for questions. I can see many domains not being the same..
2) The entire and whole team concept is loosely defined and more ever there are more conflicts then progress that i can imagine  with such loose objectives / user stories/features.
3) i was surprised when there are many good  quality  sources claiming to be popular which did not make logical sense.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.184.73.224 (talk) 18:47, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Agree XP cannot be most popular  

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Extreme programming practices. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061215120657/http://www.xprogramming.com/xpmag/whatisxp.htm to http://www.xprogramming.com/xpmag/whatisxp.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:00, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified