Ok, I’m sorry, I’m going to ruffle feathers here but… I’m trying to read some newer development process books and… oh my… even super popular ones are so immensely long winded and unconvincing in their dogmatic argumentation: this is bad, this is good, because I said so that’s why.

Recent examples that I’m struggling to finish: “Team Topologies” and “Data Mesh” - I mean they might be great but I’m getting strong “this should’ve been a blogpost” feels.

The worst part of Agile and Lean etc has been the wave of folks earning their living telling you confidently how to build while they themselves have barely ever shipped anything.
I mean… get that money I guess… but it sucks to be continuously refactored *cough* reorged because someone who can’t build read the executive summary of a book by someone who can’t build.
Jeez this was hash, Patricia. Eat your dinner.
I’m dying. “If people are talking with each other of their own accord that’s a bad sign because…” I don’t even know.
Dear lord are they reinventing silos but with fancy words?
I ate. And it didn’t help.
“Monolith bad!” “Micro services good!” “People talking bad! People talking is basically a MONOLITH 👻”
I think maybe I shouldn’t be allowed to read.
Seriously so far the good parts of Team Topologies are the parts they have taken from other peoples work.
I suddenly remembered the Agile Coach I pissed off a few years ago that angrily told me he had actually been a dev for two years fifteen years ago!
Omg these people are ridiculously condescending
Help. Why do folks love this book?
Please. It is a mashup of 10 other pieces of original work.
@Patricia well people still like the bible so