Comments on: Agile Vancouver Tech Talk http://exortech.com/blog/2008/02/13/agile-vancouver-tech-talk/ Peripatetic thinking Sat, 15 Jan 2011 18:20:06 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Agile Vancouver Tech Talk #2 - TDD vs BDD at exortech.com http://exortech.com/blog/2008/02/13/agile-vancouver-tech-talk/comment-page-1/#comment-36 Agile Vancouver Tech Talk #2 - TDD vs BDD at exortech.com Fri, 14 Mar 2008 04:33:32 +0000 http://exortech.com/blog/2008/02/13/agile-vancouver-tech-talk/#comment-36 [...] Monday night, Skye and I hosted the second Agile Vancouver tech talk. This month’s topic was test-driven development (TDD) vs. behaviour-driven development (BDD). [...] [...] Monday night, Skye and I hosted the second Agile Vancouver tech talk. This month’s topic was test-driven development (TDD) vs. behaviour-driven development (BDD). [...]

]]> By: exortech http://exortech.com/blog/2008/02/13/agile-vancouver-tech-talk/comment-page-1/#comment-18 exortech Wed, 13 Feb 2008 05:54:18 +0000 http://exortech.com/blog/2008/02/13/agile-vancouver-tech-talk/#comment-18 Saem: thanks for your feedback. I also would like to try a session with small groups. But as this was just the first session, I'd like to keep the format consistent, at least for the next meeting, so that people know what to expect. Saem: thanks for your feedback. I also would like to try a session with small groups. But as this was just the first session, I’d like to keep the format consistent, at least for the next meeting, so that people know what to expect.

]]> By: Saem http://exortech.com/blog/2008/02/13/agile-vancouver-tech-talk/comment-page-1/#comment-17 Saem Wed, 13 Feb 2008 04:46:30 +0000 http://exortech.com/blog/2008/02/13/agile-vancouver-tech-talk/#comment-17 I was there as well -- one of the proponents of distributed VCS. I think one of the most interesting positions was that the need to branch in order to maintain stability (or even heavy merge conflicts) could be a bad code smell. I think breaking it up into, a kick-off, small group interactions, presentation of outcomes from the small group interactions, and then a final discussion to wrap things up, might be more interesting. I was there as well — one of the proponents of distributed VCS.

I think one of the most interesting positions was that the need to branch in order to maintain stability (or even heavy merge conflicts) could be a bad code smell.

I think breaking it up into, a kick-off, small group interactions, presentation of outcomes from the small group interactions, and then a final discussion to wrap things up, might be more interesting.

]]>