Chapter seven, entitled “Technical Practices,” covers the topics of ideal programming practices and why they should be utilized in the field. Of course by best practices I’m speaking of TDD, CI, paired programming, etc. These are the topics that have been covered at length in The Clean Coder and my related blogs. I found it interesting that Mancuso has a separate section for refactoring outside of TDD. For those who are unaware, refactoring is a step within test driven development. Therefore, if TDD has been utilized, then there is no need to explicitly describe refactoring.
Chapter eight, entitled “The Long Road,” is an interesting chapter about career choices. We all know that money is a motivating factor when making career choices, but taking money out of the equation leaves you with the following three factors:
Autonomy: It is when we are in control of what we do, how we do it, and when we do it. That should always be the case in a true Agile context.
Mastery: It is when we are constantly learning and evolving—becoming bet- ter professionals and better human beings.
Purpose: It is when we feel that our job is important and we are contributing to make things better—instead of just doing what we are told without under- standing why.
Once we get a grasp on where we want our careers to go, and what factors motivate us, it is easier to find the right jobs. This doesn’t just happen, it requires a lot of work and effort in order to “craft” our careers. Mancuso thinks it is important to differentiate between a career and a career within a company. Your career is more important than a career within a company. I think that your career and your career within a company are equally as important, and should more often than not align, but then again I have not worked in the field.
I was speaking with one of my professors today about Sandro Mancuso’s The Software Craftsman and was expressing my preference of this book to Robert C. Martin’s The Clean Coder. I may have deluded myself into believing that Mancuso uses less anecdotes than Martin in his writings. I am not infallible. Mancuso does use an exorbitant amount of anecdotes in his book.
Chapter five is called “Heroes, Goodwill, and Professionalism” and after reading the chapter I’m still not sure I understand what the title means. Goodwill does not even appear in the chapter. This chapter reminds me of parts of a few chapters from The Clean Coder especially the chapter on “How to Say ‘No.'” I’m not going to recap previous blogs so if you are interested in Professionalism I invite you to read my series of blogs on The Clean Coder as that is the theme of that book.
Chapter six is called “Working Software” and it is a pretty simple chapter. Essentially the main idea behind this chapter is that if code is going to be used for any extended period of time, it must be written properly. “Working software is not enough.” Rushing through the process and skipping steps is going to cost you time later, so it is in your best interest to take your time. Mancuso also describes how to address legacy code. He points out that nobody likes working with legacy code, but a change in attitude can make a world of difference. Isn’t that true of everything though?
Sprint 6 marks the final sprint of our semester. Our goal was to complete APTS-254 issue by the end the sprint. The rest of our group ran into roadblocks and joined us in our endeavor. We also hit roadblocks and needed more clarification. Even though we found where in the code we needed to add the case, we weren’t positive about what the established reminders were doing. So we determined that the only way we would be able to figure out exactly how these reminders worked was to recreate the scenarios in which they would appear. Unfortunately, we were unable ETL server to work on our computers so we were essentially taking shots in the dark.
With all of this uncertainty, and the delayed response time from the people at Ampath, it was virtually impossible to accomplish anything of any substance. In the end we were unable to complete our goal of finishing APTS-254, which means that we were only able to complete one issue this semester. Perhaps I set lofty goals for our team, or maybe we underperformed, but one thing is for sure. I can’t wait to spend way more time developing my own Angular 2 project.
Sprint 5 began with our solution to NGPOC-185 was pulled into Ampath. We also started work on some new issues we assigned ourselves from JIRA. In accordance with what we decided last week we picked two issues, one for each group of three. Our group picked APTS-254 which was described as “User are requesting when a patient switches to 2nd Line the Viral Load Pop-up reminder should not pop until the patient has used the 2nd Line Regimen for 6 months.” Just as we did with NGPOC-185, we decided the best course of action was to attempt to recreate the issue and then find where in the code the issue was located. Neither individually nor as a group could the issue be recreated so we determined that we needed additional clarification on the issue. I wrote a message to Ampath, but it took awhile to get a response, delaying our progress. Before the sprint ended, we did get a response. Apparently the issue was located in the ETL Rest Server, which we did not have before. They directed us to the repository, but even with this new information we were unable to recreate the issue. We will continue to work on this issue next sprint.
To start our fourth sprint we divided the NGPOC-185 issue into distinct parts so that everyone on our team could dig their hands into the issue. We broke the task into six parts and everyone picked a piece they thought they would do best. I was going to take everyone’s individual piece and combine them into the final solution. Unfortunately, we were mistaken. Our solution was incorrect because our approach was all wrong. Over Spring Break one of the members of our group determined that the solution was much more simple than what we were attempting. Once I returned from Spring Break, I had a chance to review his approach. Apparently we were looking at the wrong thing and once we received some clarification the solution came together in a couple of days.
With our solution complete, we determined that these issues were not as complicated as we originally thought, and broke our group into groups of three. This way we can complete twice as many issues per sprint.
This past sprint our class was assigned four issues on JIRA, an issue-tracking software. AMPATH set all of us up with our own login information so that we could view, assign, and comment on the issues. The issue we wanted to work on was given to another group, so we ended up getting our second choice, called NGPOC-185. The title of NGPOC-185 was “Logout not working when editing a form” and had the description “if you are in the middle of editing a form, but you decide to cancel and logout (may not be a practical case) , after accepting to cancel, it should log you out.”
As a team we determined that the issue was asking us to have a confirmation window pop up when a user tries to logout while they are editing a form. So we figured our first step would be try to recreate the issue. We booted up our local server and determined what the issue was describing. Our next step was to find the code the corresponded to the issue. After some searching we think we figured out where to begin. We decided our best course of action was to read up on Materialize CSS and then attempt the issue next sprint.
For this post I read chapters 3 and 4 out of Sandro Mancuso’s The Software Craftsman. In these chapters Mancuso breaks down what he means by Software Craftsmanship. First and foremost a Software Craftsman is a professional who is constantly learning new tools and techniques. In chapter 3, “Software Craftsmanship,” Mancuso presents and explains the Software Craftsmanship Manifesto:
Not only working software,
but also well-crafted software
Not only responding to change,
but also steadily adding value
Not only individuals and interactions,
but also a community of professionals
Not only customer collaboration,
but also productive partnerships
The second piece of every part of the Software Craftsmanship Manifesto simply elaborates on the first piece. This is very different from the Agile Manifesto which contains contrasting ideas. In this way, the Software Craftsmanship Manifesto seems almost intuitive. For example, take the first piece, “Not only working software, but also well-crafted software.” The next logical step from working software is software that is well put together. In TDD after you write a test, you write code that makes that test pass. Then you write another test, and more code to pass that test. Refactor and repeat. Using this technique you write not only working software, but as you progress, the software becomes well crafted. So I guess I can understand someone feeling as though they need to lay out these guidelines, but as these techniques have developed over time, the aspects of the Software Craftsmanship Manifesto seem almost inevitable.
Chapter 4 is entitled “The Software Craftsmanship Attitude.” This chapter is essentially a recap of The Clean Coder in its entirety. Instead of going through all of the content of this chapter, I would like to refer you to my previous posts. After reading this chapter, and without having read the rest of this book, I would think that simply reading this book would cover most of, if not all, of the pertinent information from Robert C. Martin’s The Clean Coder. I think that the overlap is probably pretty substantial.