Private chat pops up. (- separator for new message)

Hello
- (1 min)
Can you help me?
- (2-3 mins)
Please it's urgeeeent!!!!!
- (1 min)
Come on you're online, I see the green dot.
- (5 mins)
Ok then I won't be able to work. Will write this down in the ticket.

- (15 mins) - new private chat pops up
Hi, we need to talk.
- (3 mins)
Regarding ticket XY, why aren't you responding? It's really urgent.
- (5 mins)
Please notify me as soon as you're available, it's really important!!!

- (20 mins, new private chat opens)
Hi mate, I think the devs are up to mischief. Said you're not reachable, I'll try to poke them with the stun gun.

- (60 mins, message in the official and only endorsed support room)
@all We broke staging, <Me> never responds and <Team mate who tried to use the stun gun> wasn't helpful either.
We really need this now!!!!!!!

- 30 mins later... la me:
@all I was in a meeting with the stakeholders as we had an priority meeting... What was so important that you not only ignored the rule of not messaging privately and even ignored <team mate>s instructions?

- 5 mins later, answer
no need to be so unfriendly.... We broke staging as we had to test stuff out for next week's sprint review [something which is still 3 days away or sth like that]. We really need to take a look in the team at it and for that we must have staging working now!!!!
- (La me)
If you need it urgent now, you didn't plan ahead. And if you didn't plan ahead, you have to wait for others. The sprint review and all other important days are planned ahead for a reason.
- (Silence)

- (20 mins later, private chat, team lead)
Will you finally fix staging now?

- La me
If it could wait 3 hours now and you / your team ignored all netiquette, it can wait till next day, too. We had this discussion more than once, I don't think I need to explain this further.

(Silence)

All in all, the joys of communication...

Now the fun stuff is when this not only happens with 1 team, but many teams....

Having 35 - 40 private chats and chat window looking like a christmas tree thx to the immeasurable amount of notifications and colors... Yay...

Did I mention that I hate the ego some programmers have -.

One of our dev teams has a tradition: after each post-sprint review one of the devs tells a wood joke. The lamer, the better.

So far the winner is:

Q: What did Batman say to Robin before Robin got in the car?
A: Robin, get in the car

It's so dumb it's actually somehow even funny :)

PM was on vacation the whole sprint.
this sprint was so much more... convenient. i really liked what i was working on.
Also, team lost some of its bureaucratic discipline along the way.

colleague replacing him, in today's daily: since the sprint is basically almost over, i can really recommend to the whole team to wrap up your work of this sprint, so you have something *done* that you can deliver or show in next week's sprint review.
team: ...

oooohhh boy, let me get a shitload of popcorn for the sprint review when PM is back 🍿🍿🍿🍿🍿🍿🍿🍿

Story of WTF happened to my job

During my employment in (name censored) was stressful, They claimed I didn't complete my task on time which they constantly remove me from git and documentation(which have to follow their style of returning data), I kept emailing, slack, WhatsApp calls them, mostly and predictably got ghosted and blocked.

So How the fuck am I supposed to push my code or code without the documentation (I can actually, prevent refactoring every time, following the documentation is the good way to go.)

On the sprint review, they will complain about me not committing and pushing the code. (I did commit locally, but can't push, they removed me from the fucking repo) and not done.

Tried reasoning, telling the obvious reasons with them, doesn't work. They come out the second reason of me "NOT COMMUNICATING". Sometimes I can get to git merge from dev to my branch and get tonnes of fucked up code. I reviewed the code, and I can't tolerate it.

Lately, I overheard them mocking and cheering me about to get fired over a zoom meeting (I was in there, they forgot to remove me). Their conversation is about me being a coloniser, a jerk, betraying Chinese ancestors for being not Chinese enough.

I was like: "Why the fuck does their conversation sound like they are tucked in the Qin dynasty?"

Frequently I got labelled as unprofessional.

How is cussing about my ancestors, personal and life a professional behaviour?

meeting with PM, 1:1
me: well, to be honest, i think there is also some room for improvement concerning communication in our meetings. the discussion culture in our meetings could be more open.
PM: what do you mean? i don't know what you're talking about.
me: well, i feel sometimes that in meetings, you overly challenge what colleagues suggest. on the other hand, it's really hard to argue against what you are saying. what you say is often like engraved into stone and it is hard to argue against that, but the next day you might have changed your mind again and then things are different, but engraved into stone again.
PM: hmm. can you give me some more concrete example?
me: well... (gives some examples) it's just that it would be nice if you would listen more to what people say in meetings and try to understand what they actually mean or want to say, instead of saying "nah, that's not how we do it" or "no, that's wrong"... just.. well, have more trust in our skills, try to find out what people mean before you discard what you think they said... a bit more of appreciation and openness.
PM: oh, i can tell you, i'm the MOST open manager in this whole company.
me: ...
PM: but anyway, i will think about it.
me: well... okay. also i see there are some challenges within our team concerning intercultural communication. i mean, communication between Germans and Indians is in general a bit problematic in our company, and maybe it is a good idea to have some workshop together concerning intercultural competences... i think we could benefit from that. (what i actually meant is, these problems exist, but currently i see them more on his side or between him and Indian colleagues, because e.g. he tends to harshly criticize people in daily standups, and if we "direct" Germans already feel affronted by his behavior, how must Indian guys feel about it? in fact, 2 Indian devs already left the project. also communication doesn't really work well, in a way that there's often a great mismatch between his expectations and what Indian devs actually think they have to do)
PM: i can tell you, i really understand our Indian colleagues, i really know how to work with them. also, their working style has greatly improved since project start. (which doesn't feel quite right after he totally ripped apart the work of one guy in the last sprint review meeting)

of course, that's not the whole conversation, but it's kind of a symptomatic example for the whole situation...

Client: we are using Scrum. Next week we have sprint review organized by the project manager.
Me: it’s not Scrum.
Client: in the next sprint we work on a mockup not releasable in production.
Me: it’s not Scrum.
Client: sprint backlog is changed again, at the end we must do everything that is written in the contract with that fixed amount of money.
Me: definitely not Scrum.
Client: we are using Scrum.
Me: Ok.

Wrote a feature that took a week plus to complete that was reviewed, approved, merged and already in production.

Guy who approved comes in and says to make changes now with 1 day to end of sprint saying to refactor stuff. It won't make a difference other than some logging changes but I found the effort to be large plus the QA would need to retest everything.

When I brought up my concern, he tells me it is very easy and to get it done.

Now am feeling so stuck rushing on this work cos he called it 'easy' and I don't want to look like a fool...

Why review and approve code only to come back last minute asking for changes.. Not the first time and always last minute followed by calling it easy. I am almost forming a phobia to merge approved code..

So my company hired this very old guy. The oldest developer I have worked with. I feel they took him just because of diversity.

Because he was absolutely incompetent.

Nothing he wrote ever worked, he got in conflict with everyone, made stupid jokes at meetings, asked the dumbest questions. His stories would hang for weeks, hopping sprint over sprint. Once he delivered something, his code had to be re-written from scratch. A code review couldn't even be applied as the code was worthless, so it just made sense to reassign his tasks to someone else and move on.

So after much drama he was let go. It was maybe two years ago and I recently connected with him on LinkedIn. He's changed four or more jobs since then. Prior to coming to our company he also job-hopped all the time (but most likely he was actually fired every time). His average job duration was like 6 months. Apart from that, he had a 20+ year stay with some government agency.

I fail to grasp how he ever gets hired anywhere with all the red flags. Over two decades with some govt agency (in my country they are all crap). Then change jobs every half an year or so. Then the asshole attitude. And finally, they probably never asked him any technical questions, because he knew nothing. Our interns who were just one month into the job were better by a WIDE margin.

During sprint review😁

The company I work at sends their developers out to other companies to help them work on projects and help them in other ways (advice when communicating to customers of on demand software for example).

While not on a project you are working in house training trainees and interns. Part of that is teaching them to show initiative and treating them as full developers. The 30 interns all discussed a git flow and code format.
During the third sprint (two weeks sprints) a team messaged me if I wanted to check their merge request for the sprint.

It took me a glance at the first file to know they didnt do any review themselves. I used my flywheel to check all their changes and without being able to read the code I saw indentation was all over the place, inconsistent bracket placements etc. I let them know I wouldnt check their code until it was according to their own standards.
Two days later I got the message to check it again. At first glance the indentation was fine so I started reading the code. Every single thing was hardcoded, not made to support mobile (or any resolution other than 1920×1080).
A week later they improved it and still not good. Gave them a few pointers like I would for any colleague and off they went to fix things. The code became worse and indentation was all over the place.

I told them the next time it shouldnt be a quick glance to be able to reject it again. By this time other teams came to me asking why it wasnt merged yet and I explained it to them. One of the teams couldnt do anything u til this was merged so I told them to implement it themselves. I was surprised that 4 teams came to me asking about a merge request, that was every team except the team whose pull request it was.

4 weeks after the intitial sprint the other team made a merge request and I had three small comments and then an hour later it was merged.

The other team messaged me why their merge request did went through (still havent seen any of their team in person, Im sitting 10 meters away from them behind a wall)
They also said that it was easier for them because they started from scratch. Thats when I called them in to discuss it all and if they were not interns but full time developers they would have been fired. I told them communication is key and that if you dont understand something you come in person to ask about it. They all knew I like teaching and have the patience to explain a single thing ten times, but the initiative should be theirs.

One of the team members is my current coworker and he learned his lesson by that. The others stopped with their study and started doing something completely else.

TL;DR
Merge request is open for 4 weeks, in the end another team started from scratch and finished it within a week. The original team didnt ask me questions or come to me in person, where other teams did.

DISCLAIMER: some of you might find it harsh, but in our experience it works the best for teaching and we know when people don't dare to ask questions and we help them in that too. It's all about the soft skills at our company.

When your sprint review is turned into a 5 hour argument about how to effectively do scrum and all you want to do is code.

Biggest teamwork fail? This is the general way we do business where I work right now:
My boss didn’t want to be the kind who hovers, always micromanaging. He also hates the idea of taking programmers away from their work for meetings. Sounds great, right? This has resulted in:

• All non-lead devs being excluded from all meetings other than scrum (including sprint planning and review meetings). Nobody ever knows what the hell is going on. They don’t think we “need to know.” This means most of our day is spent trying to figure out what needs to be done, rather than getting anything done.

• Our remote boss making dozens of important decisions about our platform, never telling us, and blaming us for not forcing our lead to be more communicative.

• Pull requests staying open for weeks, sometimes months, because nobody has definitively decided what version we’re actually supposed to be working on. This means our base branch could be any of them, and it means PRs that have been opened too long need to be closed, updated, and re-opened on the false promise of someone actually looking at it.

Just ranting here... but I think our biggest teamwork fail is happening right now, with all of those things ^

When the PO asks for a last second code change right before the sprint review, and now it's your turn to demo

PM in sprint review, after some colleagues complained about having to develop requirements on their own:
you are software engineers, your main task is to design software systems. this is the tricky part. coding is easy... it's a stupid task, i could do it, my nine year old daughter could do it.

shall i feel a bit offended? also i think, he is wrong... i also design while i'm coding, i'm designing all the time.
also, i love coding :( this is the most satisfying aspect of my job.
but then again, i heard there are people who code without designing... even though i cannot imagine how to work like that at all.

Just came back from vaccation yesterday. During sprint retrospective today I hear my team was having trouble dealing with the API layer (which was mostly written by me). Suggestion was a session where I sit and explain the application to the team ,which I have no problem with.

One of my teammates asserts that it's written in such a way that "only the person who wrote it can modify it".

Agree to disagree but whatever. This thing goes through code review everytime I push changes to it. If there was a problem I don't know why he's just discovering it 6 months into the project. I assure you there's no rocket surgery going on. The problem is that I have been doing everything on that side of the project and nobody was curious enough to give it a read sometime. In fact I dont think anything needed to change while I was on vacation, they just didn't have me to troubleshoot every problem for them like usual 😤

So the company decided to go agile. I am now a scrum master. And we have the local product owners and all. They made us do daily stand-ups.

I don't know what is a scrum master. Nobody knows what the hell is a stand-up. It seems to be an akward 30 minutes every day, when local product owner asks questions and demands status reports.

I did some googling and it seems that the scrum master is supposed to just support the team and solve problems. In our version the scrum master finds out the system architecture and requirements, fills the backlog, does the system design and reports to the project manager(s). Also reports to the clients about the general project status in an executive meetings. I also do the sprint planning, in which we fit the vague features that we are told into time tables with ready told dates.

Oh yeah, the team is just 2 guys. One of them is me. And the other guy relies completely on me to daily tell what to do, review the work and also answer all the project and company level questions that pop into his mind. He gets angry if he doesn't receive ready-thought solutions to all problems, since "you're the boss and it's your job to tell us what to do".

This is going to be a great year.

Management in big corp I collaborate with has decided they want intermediate releases every 4 weeks. That's kinda OK, we work in two week Scrum sprints.

However, not this sprint. Because of Easter it's three weeks. And because the 4 weeks rule is absolute, the one after that is only one week. Which implies we do the whole review-presentation-planning ceremony twice in a row. That's fucking absurd. But when management agrees on a plan, it's reality that needs to comply, right? Argh.

I'm considering quitting a job I started a few weeks ago. I'll probably try to find other work first I suppose.

I'm UK based and this is the 6th programming/DevOps role I've had and I've never seen a team that is so utterly opposed to change. This is the largest company I've worked for in a full time capacity so someone please tell me if I'm going to see the same things at other companies of similar sizes (1000 employees). Or even tell me if I'm just being too opinionated and that I simply have different priorities than others I'm working with. The only upside so far is that at least 90% of the people I've been speaking to are very friendly and aren't outwardly toxic.

My first week, I explained during the daily stand up how I had been updating the readmes of a couple of code bases as I set them up locally, updated docker files to fix a few issues, made missing env files, and I didn't mention that I had also started a soon to be very long list of major problems in the code bases. 30 minutes later I get a call from the team lead saying he'd had complaints from another dev about the changes I'd spoke about making to their work. I was told to stash my changes for a few weeks at least and not to bother committing them.

Since then I've found out that even if I had wanted to, I wouldn't have been allowed to merge in my changes. Sprints are 2 weeks long, and are planned several sprints ahead. Trying to get any tickets planned in so far has been a brick wall, and it's clear management only cares about features.

Weirdly enough but not unsurprisingly I've heard loads of complaints about the slow turn around of the dev team to get out anything, be it bug fixes or features. It's weird because when I pointed out that there's currently no centralised logging or an error management platform like bugsnag, there was zero interest. I wrote a 4 page report on the benefits and how it would help the dev team to get away from fire fighting and these hidden issues they keep running into. But I was told that it would have to be planned for next year's work, as this year everything is already planned and there's no space in the budget for the roughly $20 a month a standard bugsnag plan would take.

The reason I even had time to write up such a report is because I get given work that takes 30 minutes and I'm seemingly expected to take several days to do it. I tried asking for more work at the start but I could tell the lead was busy and was frankly just annoyed that he was having to find me work within the narrow confines of what's planned for the sprint.

So I tried to keep busy with a load of code reviews and writing reports on road mapping out how we could improve various things. It's still not much to do though. And hey when I brought up actually implementing psr12 coding standards, there currently aren't any standards and the code bases even use a mix of spaces and tab indentation in the same file, I seemingly got a positive impression at the only senior developer meeting I've been to so far. However when I wrote up a confluence doc on setting up psr12 code sniffing in the various IDEs everyone uses, and mentioned it in a daily stand up, I once again got kickback and a talking to.

It's pretty clear that they'd like me to sit down, do my assigned work, and otherwise try to look busy. While continuing with their terrible practices.

After today I think I'll have to stop trying to do code reviews too as it's clear they don't actually want code to be reviewed. A junior dev who only started writing code last year had written probably the single worst pull request I've ever seen. However it's still a perfectly reasonable thing, they're junior and that's what code reviews are for. So I went through file by file and gently suggested a cleaner or safer way to achieve things, or in a couple of the worst cases I suggested that they bring up a refactor ticket to be made as the code base was trapping them in shocking practices. I'm talking html in strings being concatenated in a class. Database migrations that use hard coded IDs from production data. Database queries that again quote arbitrary production IDs. A mix of tabs and spaces in the same file. Indentation being way off. Etc, the list goes on.
Well of course I get massive kickback from that too, not just from the team lead who they complained to but the junior was incredibly rude and basically told me to shut up because this was how it was done in this code base. For the last 2 days it's been a bit of a back and forth of me at least trying to get the guy to fix the formatting issues, and my lead has messaged me multiple times asking if it can go through code review to QA yet. I don't know why they even bother with code reviews at this point.

Been on a fairly large project for the past two months. Been getting more and more productive and confident with each sprint! Always informed that I’m doing fine. Left a four hour task in progress for a day or so while tending to a PR which had been pending for a week and a half and was currently under review. Removed from the project due to issues with velocity.

I just got an email from the project manager:

"Hi Team,
Please make sure to review the 7/12 sprint requests for (x project). Please add your estimates even if the requirements are ambiguous. Thank you."

Long story ahead

Background:
I recently started a job in a smallish startup doing web development in a mostly js stack as an entry-junior engineer/dev. I’m the only person actively working on our internal tools as my Lead Engineer (the only other in house dev) is working on other stuff.

Now I was given a two week sprint to rebuild a portion of our legacy internal app from angular 1.2 with material-ui looking components with no psd’s or cut-outs of any kind to a React and bootstrap ui for the front end and convert our .net API routes into Node.js ones. I had to build the API routes, SQL queries (as there were plenty of changes and reiterations that I had to go through to get the exact data I needed to display), and front end. I worked from 9am until 11pm every day for those two weeks including weekends as our company has a huge show this upcoming week.

I finish up this past sunday and push to our staging environment. The UI is 5.5/10 as we’re changing all of our styling to bootstrap and I’m no ui expert. The api has tests and works flawlessly (tm).

So we go into code review and everything is working as expected until one tab that I made erred out and was written down as a “Needs to be fixed.”

This fix was just a null value handler that took three minutes and a push back to staging, but that wasnt before a stupendous amount of shit being flung my way for the ui not looking great and that one bug was a huge deal and that he couldnt believe it slipped through my fingers.

Honestly, I’m feeling really unmotivated to do anything else. I overworked myself for that only to be shit on for one mistake and my ui being lack-luster with no guides.

Am I being a baby about this or is this something to learn from?

I fucking hate 1 week sprints that include review, planning, and retrospective, so technically the sprint is 4 days.

Here is our Sprint Review

Context: This team has been constantly behind on deliveries, ignoring advice from other teams or more experienced colleague, making mistake after mistake and now, just revealed they have major performance issues, as warned...

So, in the most recent Sprint review they were, once again, criticized for their bad approach and inability as a team to receive feedback and work on that feedback, resulting in mediocre development...

As I left the room I heard one of them say:
"We make this huge rocket that most wouldn't be capable of doing and they cry that it's blue and not green... Others make a ls on a command line and everybody applauds"

Now, this is for everyone to whom the shoe fits...

Listen here you little entitled snotty prick, where do you think you are!? Yes most should not make a rocket when the requirement was a bike! That's overengineering and besides that most of your decisions were arguably wrong!

I will never applaud you or anyone else for doing your fucking job and being mediocre about it... What we applaud is value added! Value to the project, to the process or to the team... Bring value and I will applaud, do your job and you get a salary. Be a snotty childish dipshit and you might find yourself forcefully searching for new professional challenge!

So we had a sprint review earlier. There were like 20 bosses who attended, head of this, head of that. We spent 5 mins to demo our application, and another 55 minutes discussing the "delivery date" 🤯

Oh my fucking god, we're doing SCRUM, why does every task get stuck in review limbo and take a sprint and a half minimum because of it.

Does anyone else find it strange that the stupidest people in the company are making all the decisions.

In order to be able to engineer software you have to understand everything that the product owner knows, the business analyst knows, the product manager knows + how to actually make the system both work in a reasonable time frame and be maintainable long-term.

But we're not the one making the decisions. The irony of it is something that I can't get beyond.

And when I do go out on a limb to point out a logical inconsistency to UX or product... They don't thank me for it they hate me for it and then 3 days later figure out that they should be doing it and quietly follow my suggestions.

Seriously is the goal here to create good software or to avoid stepping on everyone else's toes in the company who is overwhelmed by the complexity of the project.

I think companies based on a hierarchy of non-technical people controlling technical people, in the creation of software products are a dying breed.

When it comes to creating software products everyone in the hierarchy should be technically minded.

I've seriously been trying to come up with an alternative perspective here.

The executives of the company are completely out of touch and the only thing which looks like progress to them in a sprint review is something visual on the front end.

The technical architect, the product owner and the product manager all seem to be engaged in keeping the executives happy and managing their expectations. By means of obscuring the truth.

Imagine how much more cost-effective building a software product would be if the executives were engineers themselves.

I'm keen to do an experiment and build a company comprised of engineers only.

Obviously they need to have insight into the other roles. But none of these other roles are as complex as implementation itself.

So why exactly are we the slaves of these well-meaning under thinkers?

Having a meeting to decide, when to have other meetings...
Scrum, scrum of scrums, workstream, planning, pm ,design review, architecture review, Sprint review on and on....on and on on...why can't i simply code:(

Estimates.. First, part of the team makes "high-level" estimates which are based on informal, incomplete, still-evolving specs and an unstable back-end. The project people report the estimates to the client and elevate the status of these inaccurate estimates to that of commitments.

Then, before the "sprint", we review our initial estimates *ahum commitments* in greater (technical) detail. Because there are still a lot of unknowns, we tend to estimate more buffer here (back-end is often not ready, always ping-pong between project people and dev-team about unclear specs, more work than originally expected, and often late modifications to the original spec).

When an estimate becomes more than 50% extra time at the "refinement", we are told: "sorry, we gotta do it in less" and when it doesn't work out, we're kindly asked to spend part of our weekend catching up at 100% pay rate (legally it's 150-200%).

FUCK THIS SHIT

*quotes used abundantly because these terms belong to "agile/scrum" terminology but we're only pretending

me:task assigned is a small fix.Gonna finish Early sit back relax this sprint.
mail(next day):we've moved to microservices.setup as easy as gulp landscape:start
me:cool!shinny new stuff!seems easy!!
project:npm failed..please check module xxx..
me:fine.....
after long mail chain
project:npm failed unknown file not found
me:fine.....
after hours of googling and little github issue browsing
project:server running @ portxxx
me:yay finally happy life!!makes chnages, sent for review.
reviewer:code needs refactoring!!
me:make all changes..waits for faceless reviewer from another timezone!
reviewer:thumbs up.
me:i will make it in time!!!yes!!
jenkins:buid:failure
me:no still i wont give up...
debug finds out new bugs caused by unrelated code...make new PR the end is near,one day more will definitely merge!!!
mail:jenkins down for maintenance!
me:nooooo....waits till last minute gets thumbs up for merge, finally merged in the last second!!

all for 12 lines of code change.
:/
sad life

Meetings have the ability to slow you down like nothing else. The moment you feel you are about to crack the problem you have been working on.. ding! there comes a notification for the next meeting.

Currently my team has a mid sprint review meeting, an end sprint meeting, a let's plan the next sprint meeting, a team meeting, but the one I have absolute hatred for are daily standups.

Had a four hour retro/review yesterday. Plus a mini demo I had to put together. Three hour sprint planning session today.
And they still wanted me to go to some "company values" meeting tomorrow, aside from the weekly call I have to report progress. Fuck that shit.

I feel like I got nothing done this week. Monday and Tuesday were fine for the most part, but since it's been just complete idling.

I mean, I love my company, great coworkers, good management, and just all around great experience. But man, it gets frustrating when you lose so much development time... I wanted to sprinkle in some extra goodies for the next sprint, but it doesn't look like that's gonna happen.

Demo driven development.
Fucking nightmare.
Did a simple search for TODO Statements in the code and almost fucking spilt my coffee.
And the best part, they will demo most of this in Sprint review as done.. WTF.

Done means "Ready to Release" not "Ready to Demo".

I never had too much professional experience but I'm feeling so lost during this sprint. New senior developer is running laps around tasks while I'm still struggling with the new code review process we adopted, and still taking my time to understand tasks, I feel useless and even fearful of losing my job as the company (which is a growing startup) starts hiring more people.

Mid hackathon reviews.
It kills the excitement that a judge might have seeing the thing for the first time in the final review.
Instead the final review becomes - "Hey, what did you improve from the last time?"

**Its not a fucking sprint**

So I was reading Scrum for my exam all I can see was Meeting.

Product backlog meeting for 15 mins;
Enters to the office 5 mins meeting;
Sprint review meeting for 10mins;
Daily scrum 2 times meetings;
Sprint planning 3 hours of meeting;
Starting the next Sprint 30mins meetings;
Managing releases 45 min meeting;
Sprint Retrospective 45 mins of meeting;

Wtf? Do they do any work there?

What is wrong with these people!!!
Last minute changes are pain in the ass... the design team review gives a go ahead but then pm team doesnt agree and and you have to get the changes suggested done in a day??!!!
In half a day you have to get ux review, peer review, module owner review, architect review, pm review and then merge publish bump and test in ci?!!end of sprint is today...
Ugh!!!every sprint!!every fuckin sprint!!!

Group project at uni, we're learning how to do scrum sprints. So here's a small story about all the ways it can go wrong.

We assign scrum master and product owner roles, what do those do? "We want to do design tho" they say two weeks later.

I end up doing the organization part and structuring the backlog.
"Alright, you guys will be the frontend team, your tasks are X and Y"
No response
One day before the review I ask again
"So, what's the status" (well knowing that they didn't do shit so far)
They start scrambling around, and manage to do like 30% of their tasks at best, I end up doing most of the work for them.

Next week, new sprint, our tutors somehow don't notice that literally 95% of the code has been written by me so far.
"Alright team, hopefully you will do better this time, so and so will be your subteam leader since he knows this stuff"
No response
Some guys start working on independent things without collaborating with each other, sometimes replicating stuff I already did (but obviously worse).

So that's the situation so far, I really would rather kill myself than keep working with these guys, jeeesus

I hate so much all those sprint related meetings. They literally take one day totalled (every 2 weeks).
Review, dry run demo, actual demo, planning, daily hourly meetings.... so much talking.

Sprint review being used to hold discussion instead of showcasing what has been done.

Ok the sprint review is tomorrow, there are lots of work to do and qe are half slept, this gonna end well :)

How does your organisation and team balance PR comments demanding changes and dev time?

Here, while fixing PR comments we sometimes end up wasting as much time as we took in actually developing the feature... As a result, almost every major user story overshoots the estimation and almost every sprint gets delayed.

Yes, to each his own; but talking in general, why do you think this time wasting happens?
Do you think that happens because some of us are not as experienced as the others, the existing code not being up to the mark giving a bad example, or just a skewed review process?

Why do they demand 12-month goals when we use Agile Methodologies?
If we do it right, we don't know what we are working on next sprint, let alone 12 months.
Our goals are to work on the highest priority stories. We are not to work on stuff "in the background", so how can we have any long-term goals?
The only things we can plan are outside of our actual jobs (like conferences, training, pilot programs/hackathon projects, etc.) So the only things we can review at the end of the year are not the most important things we do.
Poor managers love numbers and checklists to hide behind.

How do you deal when you are overpromising and underdelivering due to really shitty unpredictable codebase? Im having 2-3 bad sprints in a row now.

For context: Im working on this point of sale app for the past 4 months and for the last 3 sprints I am strugglig with surprises and edgecases. I swear to god each time I want to implement something more complex, I have to create another 4-5 tickets just to fix the constraints or old bugs that prevent my feature implementation just so I could squeeze my feature in. That offsets my original given deadlines and its so fucking draining to explain myself to my teamlead about why feature has to be reverted why it was delayed again and so on.

So last time basically it went like this: Got assigned a feature, estimated 2 weeks to do it. I did the feature in time, got reviewed and approved by devs, got approved by QA and feature got merged to develop.

Then, during regression testing 3 blockers came up so I had to revert the feature from develop. Because QA took a very long time to test the feature and discover the blockers, now its like 3 days left until the end of the sprint. My teamlead instantly started shitting bricks, asked me to fix the blockers asap.

Now to deal with 3 blockers I had to reimplement the whole feature and create like 3 extra tickets to fix existing bugs. Feature refactor got moved to yet another sprint and 3 tickets turned into like 8 tickets. Most of them are done, I created them just to for papertrail purposes so that they would be aware of how complex this is.

It taking me already extra 2 weeks or so and I am almost done with it but Im going into really deep rabbithole here. I would ask for help but out of other 7 devs in the team only one is actually competent and helpful so I tried to avoid going to him and instead chose to do 16 hour days for 2 weeks in a row.

Guess what I cant sustain it anymore. I get it that its my fault maybe I should have asked for help sooner.

But its so fucking frustrating trying to do mental gymnastics over here while majority of my team is picking low hanging fruit tasks and sitting for 2 weeks on them but they manage to look good infront of everyone.

Meanwhile Im tryharding here and its no enough, I guess I still look incompetent infront of everyone because my 2 weeks task turned into 6 weeks and I was too stubborn to ask for help. Whats even worse now is that teamlead wants me to lead a new initiative what stresses me even more because I havent finished the current one yet. So basically Im tryharding so much and I will get even extra work on top. Fucking perfect.

My frustration comes from the point that I kinda overpromised and underdelivered. But the thing is, at this point its nearly impossible to predict how much a complex feature implementation might take. I can estimate that for example 2 weeks should be enough to implement a popup, but I cant forsee the weird edgecases that can be discovered only during development.

My frustration comes from devs just reviewing the code and not launching the app on their emulator to test it. Also what frustrates me is that we dont have enough QA resources so sometimes feature stands for extra 1-2 weeks just to be tested. So we run into a situation where long delays for testing causes late bug discovery that causes late refactors which causes late deliveries and for some reason I am the one who takes all the pressure and I have to puloff 16 hour workdays to get something done on time.

I am so fucking tired from last 2 sprints. Basically each day fucking explaining that I am still refactoring/fixing the blocker. I am so tired of feeling behind.

Now I know what you will say: always underpromise and overdeliver. But how? Explain to me how? Ok example. A feature thats add a new popup? Shouldnt take usually more than 2 weeks to do my part. What I cant promise is that devs will do a proper review, that QA wont take 2 extra weeks just to test the feature and I wont need another extra 2 weeks just to fix the blockers.

I see other scrum team devs picking low hanging fruit tasks and sitting for 2 weeks on them. Meanwhile Im doing mental gymnastics here and trying to implement something complex (which initially seemed like an easy task). For the last 2 weeks Im working until 4am.

Im fucking done. I need a break and I will start asking other devs for help. I dont care about saving my face anymore. I will start just spamming people if anything takes longer than a day to implement. Fuck it.

I am setting boundaries. 8 hours a day and In out. New blockers and 2 days left till end of the sprint? Sorry teamlead we will move fixes to another sprint.

It doesnt help that my teamlead is pressuring me and asking the same shit over and over. I dont want them to think that I am incompetent. I dont know how to deal with this shit. Im tired of explaining myself again and again. Should I just fucking pick low hanging fruit tasks but deliver them in a steady pace? Fucking hell.

I wonder if we will have a sprint review meeting for 2016. You know to prevent the shit storm that happened to continue ...