<?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: code reviews, tasks</title>
	<atom:link href="http://malvasiabianca.org/archives/2005/08/code-reviews-tasks/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://malvasiabianca.org/archives/2005/08/code-reviews-tasks/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 22 May 2012 01:20:09 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: David Carlton</title>
		<link>http://malvasiabianca.org/archives/2005/08/code-reviews-tasks/comment-page-1/#comment-3479</link>
		<dc:creator>David Carlton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Aug 2005 16:53:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=132#comment-3479</guid>
		<description>We&#039;re doing some amount of measuring.  Specifically, we&#039;re measuring how many hours we spent programming each week, how many stories we under- and over-estimated, how many stories we expected to finish but didn&#039;t.  So we probably could establish an average underestimate percentage based on that.

I&#039;d rather leave that as a bit of a last resort: for one thing, I think we have more of an estimation problem on long stories than on small stories, which suggests to me that we have to be better about splitting stories.  But if we don&#039;t get some traction on our estimates soon, I think that applying a blanket percentage makes sense.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We&#8217;re doing some amount of measuring.  Specifically, we&#8217;re measuring how many hours we spent programming each week, how many stories we under- and over-estimated, how many stories we expected to finish but didn&#8217;t.  So we probably could establish an average underestimate percentage based on that.</p>
<p>I&#8217;d rather leave that as a bit of a last resort: for one thing, I think we have more of an estimation problem on long stories than on small stories, which suggests to me that we have to be better about splitting stories.  But if we don&#8217;t get some traction on our estimates soon, I think that applying a blanket percentage makes sense.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ben Fulton</title>
		<link>http://malvasiabianca.org/archives/2005/08/code-reviews-tasks/comment-page-1/#comment-3477</link>
		<dc:creator>Ben Fulton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Aug 2005 15:58:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=132#comment-3477</guid>
		<description>Are you going back and comparing the estimates with the actual amount of time?  (Tracking your velocity?)  You might be able to establish an average underestimate percentage and modify the estimates based on it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Are you going back and comparing the estimates with the actual amount of time?  (Tracking your velocity?)  You might be able to establish an average underestimate percentage and modify the estimates based on it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using disk: basic
Page Caching using disk: enhanced (User agent is rejected)
Database Caching 7/13 queries in 0.006 seconds using disk: basic

Served from: malvasiabianca.org @ 2012-05-23 13:43:46 -->
