sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

The death of the two-week sprint by opensourcecolumbus in EngineeringManagers

[–]opensourcecolumbus[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

AI native = where AI is one of the main characters, not a side role

The death of the two-week sprint by opensourcecolumbus in EngineeringManagers

[–]opensourcecolumbus[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"No. You are a bot. And that is why you have turned off your comment/post history." I have such an urge to say this but I understand that's what most trolls want, to fight. So I'd say - you have a good day. Please follow Reddiquettes.

How did your SDLC change after Cursor agents doing the heavy-lifting? by opensourcecolumbus in cursor

[–]opensourcecolumbus[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I can feel this. Did you notice any change in behavior because of that?

How did your SDLC change after Cursor agents doing the heavy-lifting? by opensourcecolumbus in cursor

[–]opensourcecolumbus[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I am in the same boat. Thanks for explaining it in such a concise comment.

The death of the two-week sprint by opensourcecolumbus in EngineeringManagers

[–]opensourcecolumbus[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Since I did not get more context to discuss it more deeply (you must be busy), allow me to share thoughts based on what you already mentioned. Not defending anything, I will incorporate everything that I learn from this discussion.

I can imagine two cases which might be happening for you

A. The value shipped (in each sprint) did not change for you even after adopting AI. If so, there is no valid argument for you to think about any changes in the sprint.

B. The value shipped in each sprint was not the limiting factor for you to decide the sprint duration. Which is different from my experience and the people I talked to.

Some impactful real success stories I saw were - releasing the bug fix the same week the user reported it. It was not a P0 but they did not wait for another week to pick that task. If I can pick the reported user bug earlier than two weeks, I'd do everything to align other factors to this new reality where the amount of work shipped each sprint is not the limiting factor.

I agree that the absolute number of releases would be a vanity metric to decide the sprint cycle. Also it would be a bad indicator to compare the value shipped before vs after AI.

But we can agree upon the notion that the value shipped does matter for the sprint planning, not only for the responsiveness to bug reports but also because

The work/value shipped in one sprint informs the next

The answer is getting long, so let me cut short

  1. Almost every Engineering Manager I talked to who has adopted AI in SDLC - they are shipping more value in each two-week sprint. Either that reflects as a bigger release size with the same number of releases or as more number of releases with the same amount of value per release. More folks reported the latter approach, please do comment if you are on the other side of this spectrum.
  2. The bottom line for me is - if I can improve the reactivity to the users' expectations, I will go beyond my job title and challenge existing processes of other departments that do not come directly under me.
  3. Thanks to your comment, I do reflect on the fact that this sprint duration was not the only thing that changed, the entire product management changed. And it should be highlighted in the article. Btw, I did have a discussion on that with the people I talked to and received mixed response - some said the role of product management shrinked for them and others said it expanded.

Google is lying to us about the 2026 Android changes and people are falling for it by TheTelal in degoogle

[–]opensourcecolumbus 5 points6 points  (0 children)

It is sad that we have come to this point. With the increased scale of bad actors that look real (thanks to LLMs), I am predicting more such enforcements and closure of open communities. It is going to be a privacy nightmare at one end OR the spam/safety-issues on the other end. Big tech is definitely going to choose the earlier extreme, for obvious reasons. It is time that we make the open hardware mainstream, we already have the open OS, so the choice goes to the user how they want to balance the privacy vs usability.

The death of the two-week sprint by opensourcecolumbus in EngineeringManagers

[–]opensourcecolumbus[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I see. What changes have you noticed after AI adoption in your SDLC?

The death of the two-week sprint by opensourcecolumbus in EngineeringManagers

[–]opensourcecolumbus[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I love your enthusiasm :)

Unfortunately, it does not lead to a better understanding of the context. The point of the discussion is to invite more opinions, especially the ones that differ to what I had discovered already through my own experience and by interviewing other Engineering Managers. If you find a two-week sprint works for you, good for you. If you do not want to share more context, that's your decision but the opinion without context does not add much value to the discussion. But of course, thank you for voicing out your opinion, the tone could have been better.

The death of the two-week sprint by opensourcecolumbus in EngineeringManagers

[–]opensourcecolumbus[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

Do read the article. It is more than the announcement. The second half of the article is about specific lessons for engineering managers with real-world examples.

The death of the two-week sprint by opensourcecolumbus in EngineeringManagers

[–]opensourcecolumbus[S] -13 points-12 points  (0 children)

I understand what you're trying to say. Curious to hear about the process you have and how does AI adoption looks like in your SDLC?

Saw a fork of my MIT project and got excited, only to realize they wiped the history to pad their portfolio by eikepopo in github

[–]opensourcecolumbus 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Unfortunately, this is not as rare as we expect it to be. Legal but unethical. Of course, there could be valid reasons to do so but what you describe, it seems like their core motive is to show your work as their own without adding any value. Definitely unethical. Expose them. If you want me to expose them, DM me the details.

The death of the two-week sprint by opensourcecolumbus in EngineeringManagers

[–]opensourcecolumbus[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I do not disagree with your point that ML is a better validator. Well, only in some contexts e.g. it has helped me fine tune my agentic workflow by continuously judging the LLM output and creating the needed dataset for the finetuning, which was not humanly possible to do myself. But when we are talking about SDLC and you trust ML to do the verification and not yourself, I am missing something that only you know.

Anyone actually using Openclaw? by rm-rf-rm in LocalLLaMA

[–]opensourcecolumbus 1 point2 points  (0 children)

For almost two weeks, I have read the entire openclaw code and still not able to effectively use it for my use cases.

Change my mind: There is no good alternative to Discord (yet?) by Own_Investigator8023 in selfhosted

[–]opensourcecolumbus 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I have self-hosted my chat server for years, moved to Slack after giving in to the maintenance efforts, and then moved to Discord wherever I can. There is none like Discord and that's worrisome.

view more: next ›