Agile is snake oil; Nu-softdev is a failure

>>>Zig Forums

What actually prevents project demands from being made immutable?

Double-digit IQ confirmed.

The project is serving the business needs of a client, which are dynamic and based on their vision, company politics/employee turnover, and customer feedback.

Theoretically, you could agree that any requirements gathered in the analysis stage of the project will remain immutable. In practice, what this means is the client would probably receive a software solution that doesn't quite accurately fulfill their needs. The reason for this is because clients don't necessarily understand every single minute detail (as well as the consequences of each detail) of their information processes and therefore, they won't advocate for those details. It would be the system analyst's responsibility to draw this kind of detail out from the stakeholders.

Then you'd start a new project to refactor the initial product, clearly outlining your criticisms.

That is more time and money spent to get the same result (at best) as an iterative process. This is why good client project managers will not use waterfall.

fucking cultists

How does Agile prevent this? Agile doesn't eliminate the need for software architecture, it just takes it out of the trackers. The client can easily render all the "Agile" work useless just the same as any other organization method. And generally speaking, if your architecture can't support new features (that aren't wildly out of scope), what the hell were you doing? Or are you really just saying to make everything microservices (hint, that's just the Unix philosophy rebranded) It's like you've mixed five different issues together and labeled the mythical solution as "Agile."

All it means is that they use trello or some equivalent kanban-cuck software to "organize". It's retarded bloat created in an attempt to make females and female derivatives feel like they are doing something worthwhile with company time.

or sticky notes if they're literal niggers