Timeline for Is backlog refinement (grooming) waste?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 18, 2020 at 8:23 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Commonmark migration
|
|
| Oct 3, 2016 at 13:33 | history | edited | RubberDuck | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 6 characters in body
|
| Oct 2, 2016 at 18:06 | comment | added | RubberDuck | I just came across this article about necessary waste. Seems relevant. | |
| Sep 14, 2016 at 9:27 | comment | added | RubberDuck | That's my understanding as well @BartvanIngenSchenau. What I'm saying is that it's waste (non-value add), but it's a necessity until you stop generating inventory. Until you stop piling into your inventory, you have to manage it. Even then you still have to manage it, but if you have very little to manage, there's very little time wasted managing it. | |
| Sep 14, 2016 at 9:25 | comment | added | Bart van Ingen Schenau | Perhaps this is a terminology breakup, but I understand backlog grooming to be the process to keep the backlog in shape, which include breaking the top Epic/Feature into smaller Features/Stories, but also ensuring that there are not too many fully-detailed stories on the backlog. | |
| Sep 14, 2016 at 8:11 | vote | accept | Eirik M | ||
| Sep 14, 2016 at 0:00 | history | edited | RubberDuck | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 120 characters in body
|
| Sep 13, 2016 at 23:55 | history | answered | RubberDuck | CC BY-SA 3.0 |