0:00:16.820,0:00:18.220
JOE MOORE: My name is Joe Moore,

0:00:18.220,0:00:22.590
and I've pair programmed for almost thirteen

0:00:22.590,0:00:25.710
and a half, almost every single working day.

0:00:25.710,0:00:30.730
And for the last four years, I've pair programmed

0:00:30.730,0:00:33.860
remotely using remote pair programming full[br]time,

0:00:33.860,0:00:37.340
out of those thirteen years. I work for Pivotal[br]Labs.

0:00:37.340,0:00:41.250
We're a Agile software-development consultancy.

0:00:41.250,0:00:45.920
And I work remotely from Atlanta.

0:00:45.920,0:00:48.080
There's two of you who didn't hear this. I'd

0:00:48.080,0:00:52.260
love feedback at bit.ly dot com slash pairprogrammingama,[br]it's

0:00:52.260,0:00:56.920
totally anonymous. And, also, for the other[br]people who

0:00:56.920,0:00:59.050
walked in, there's a microphone here and a[br]microphone

0:00:59.050,0:01:01.680
over here. If you have questions, it'd be[br]great

0:01:01.680,0:01:03.649
if you could make your way that way and

0:01:03.649,0:01:05.590
start, and queue up while I kind of blab

0:01:05.590,0:01:08.840
on about some other stuff. If not, I'm gonna

0:01:08.840,0:01:11.450
grab these mics and I'm gonna run around,[br]and

0:01:11.450,0:01:15.050
do a, I don't know, a Maury, maybe. I

0:01:15.050,0:01:18.640
don't know who's, is he still around?

0:01:18.640,0:01:22.270
Anyway. So, again, thank you for all, everybody[br]for

0:01:22.270,0:01:25.710
coming here. Who is familiar, at least somewhat,[br]with

0:01:25.710,0:01:31.729
pair programming? I'm gonna call that eighty[br]to ninety

0:01:31.729,0:01:33.939
percent. That's great. So, for those of you[br]who

0:01:33.939,0:01:37.110
don't know, pair programming is a software[br]development technique,

0:01:37.110,0:01:40.090
by which two programmers work on the same[br]code,

0:01:40.090,0:01:42.689
at the same time, solving the same software[br]problem

0:01:42.689,0:01:45.820
on the same computer. That's what pair programming[br]is.

0:01:45.820,0:01:47.490
And you can throw the word remote on there,

0:01:47.490,0:01:49.460
and guess what, that's all that stuff, just[br]using

0:01:49.460,0:01:54.509
some remote collaboration softwares, such[br]as video chat and

0:01:54.509,0:01:56.720
audio chat and screen sharing and such.

0:01:56.720,0:01:59.719
So what are the benefits of pair programming?[br]I

0:01:59.719,0:02:01.810
could have slides and slides and slides, but[br]I'll

0:02:01.810,0:02:03.909
just give you a few. It's everything from[br]having

0:02:03.909,0:02:09.829
a continuous code review to cross-training[br]junior people and

0:02:09.829,0:02:13.560
older people, or, or more experienced people.[br]Cross-training people

0:02:13.560,0:02:16.750
from different disciplines. You tend to introduce[br]fewer bugs

0:02:16.750,0:02:21.010
because you have two eyes on the same thing.

0:02:21.010,0:02:23.730
You have differing opinions, which is really[br]great, because

0:02:23.730,0:02:26.260
that ends up raising what I call the whole

0:02:26.260,0:02:30.169
team to what I call the highest common denominator.

0:02:30.169,0:02:32.880
Because that kind of disagreement and such[br]is really

0:02:32.880,0:02:34.389
great. And it goes on and on and on

0:02:34.389,0:02:37.730
and on from there. In general, the general[br]principle,

0:02:37.730,0:02:40.100
I think as most of us know, in almost

0:02:40.100,0:02:42.109
everything, two heads are better than one[br]when you're

0:02:42.109,0:02:44.880
trying to solve hard problems.

0:02:44.880,0:02:49.750
What are the challenges of pair programming?[br]It's extremely,

0:02:49.750,0:02:53.910
it can be very exhausting. Personality conflicts[br]can be

0:02:53.910,0:02:57.600
difficult when people don't necessarily get[br]along. It's definitely

0:02:57.600,0:03:01.100
what I would consider to be the most difficult

0:03:01.100,0:03:06.169
software development practice to implement,[br]both from a social

0:03:06.169,0:03:08.639
point of view, from selling it to people on

0:03:08.639,0:03:11.959
the ground people, to selling it to management[br]that

0:03:11.959,0:03:14.889
it's, not it's not just, it's not double the

0:03:14.889,0:03:18.109
money and twice the time, et cetera. But it

0:03:18.109,0:03:20.979
also, I feel, has the greatest benefits. So,[br]it's

0:03:20.979,0:03:22.820
the hardest, but it's got the biggest pay[br]off,

0:03:22.820,0:03:26.790
if you're willing to dedicate yourself to[br]it.

0:03:26.790,0:03:30.229
And this is the, one of the top three

0:03:30.229,0:03:32.600
questions, so I thought I'd go ahead and take

0:03:32.600,0:03:34.229
care of that now. When do you decide to

0:03:34.229,0:03:35.880
breaks? When do you decide to go to the

0:03:35.880,0:03:39.290
bathroom? And the answer is, whenever you[br]need to

0:03:39.290,0:03:42.699
go to the bathroom is the optimum time when

0:03:42.699,0:03:46.540
you should probably do so. And it kind of

0:03:46.540,0:03:51.010
points to, you know, you're just people working[br]together.

0:03:51.010,0:03:52.470
You know, you, you decide to take breaks when

0:03:52.470,0:03:54.729
you're ready to take breaks. If you've been[br]going

0:03:54.729,0:03:56.639
for an hour, you've been going for more than

0:03:56.639,0:03:58.949
an hour. Yeah, take a break. Stretch your[br]legs.

0:03:58.949,0:04:01.570
Play from ping pong. Use facilities. What[br]you're kind

0:04:01.570,0:04:04.350
of into. Take breaks. It's a super intense[br]discipline.

0:04:04.350,0:04:07.470
You, you do get tired, and taking breaks is

0:04:07.470,0:04:09.720
super important. And do so whenever you feel[br]like

0:04:09.720,0:04:12.680
you need it. Need to.

0:04:12.680,0:04:16.850
And with that, ask me anything. Who's got[br]a

0:04:16.850,0:04:18.769
question? Over here there's a question.

0:04:18.769,0:04:21.978
QUESTION: So, my team has been doing pairing,[br]but

0:04:21.978,0:04:25.090
we find that, just subjectively, that it tends[br]to

0:04:25.090,0:04:26.790
slow things down by maybe fifty to a hundred

0:04:26.790,0:04:30.410
QUESTION: In other words, things tend to go[br]up

0:04:30.410,0:04:33.260
to twice as slow when we do it. But

0:04:33.260,0:04:35.070
we still use it for our hard things, like

0:04:35.070,0:04:39.800
ramping up a new developer on a project, or

0:04:39.800,0:04:43.590
laying the, the foundations for a new project.[br]But

0:04:43.590,0:04:45.150
not for a lot of other things, because of

0:04:45.150,0:04:46.250
the time cost. And I was wondering if you

0:04:46.250,0:04:49.100
could comment on how it effects your velocity[br]and

0:04:49.100,0:04:50.680
maybe we just need to look further down the

0:04:50.680,0:04:52.400
road to see pay offs and velocity? Is it

0:04:52.400,0:04:54.460
one of those things?

0:04:54.460,0:04:57.500
J.M.: Sure. So, I'm hopefully not going. Raise[br]your

0:04:57.500,0:05:01.180
hand if you could not hear the question. Everybody

0:05:01.180,0:05:03.220
could hear the question. That's great. Cause[br]it'd be

0:05:03.220,0:05:05.750
great not to spend time repeating. So it looks

0:05:05.750,0:05:08.030
like the mics are working.

0:05:08.030,0:05:09.100
So, you all heard the question. Velocity seems[br]to

0:05:09.100,0:05:13.920
slow down. I think that the empirical evidence[br]has

0:05:13.920,0:05:17.590
shown that, at least in a controlled environment,[br]pair

0:05:17.590,0:05:20.400
programming has been shown to slow down accomplishment[br]of

0:05:20.400,0:05:24.000
tasks by fifteen - one five - percent in

0:05:24.000,0:05:27.370
a controlled environment. And I think that[br]this is

0:05:27.370,0:05:30.400
often with college students who are either[br]paired up

0:05:30.400,0:05:33.330
or doing solo. So that's certainly not fifty[br]-

0:05:33.330,0:05:37.210
well, five-zero - to a hundred percent.

0:05:37.210,0:05:38.730
And there, there are other pay offs. But I

0:05:38.730,0:05:42.780
guess my initial reaction would be, you know,[br]pair

0:05:42.780,0:05:46.080
programming is a tool, and the, you know,[br]the,

0:05:46.080,0:05:49.210
I would call it the lower-case agile toolbox.[br]You

0:05:49.210,0:05:51.910
know, not the, you know, it doesn't, it's[br]not

0:05:51.910,0:05:55.050
necessarily mandated. But there are other[br]things that you

0:05:55.050,0:05:57.300
might be able to apply if you find that

0:05:57.300,0:05:58.790
things are just going really slow. And that[br]is

0:05:58.790,0:06:01.640
identifying the issue. And maybe you've already[br]done this.

0:06:01.640,0:06:05.260
You've already identified, this is taking[br]twice as long

0:06:05.260,0:06:08.300
and here are the five reasons why. And they're

0:06:08.300,0:06:10.210
insurmountable reasons.

0:06:10.210,0:06:13.590
So, I would say, you might want to use,

0:06:13.590,0:06:16.170
you know, what's called a retrospective, or[br]investigate, you

0:06:16.170,0:06:18.180
know, dig deep into why things are taking[br]too

0:06:18.180,0:06:21.560
long. Are you arguing about stuff? Are, are[br]the

0:06:21.560,0:06:24.510
pairings so unbalanced that the senior people[br]are constantly

0:06:24.510,0:06:28.400
trying to pull up people who are, are, are

0:06:28.400,0:06:31.250
more junior? Are there differing opinions[br]and people are

0:06:31.250,0:06:33.530
just constantly arguing? Those are, you know,[br]there could

0:06:33.530,0:06:35.760
be many, many reasons, so identifying the[br]problem is

0:06:35.760,0:06:37.850
the first step to figuring out maybe why it's

0:06:37.850,0:06:41.410
taking that long, because in my experience,[br]it should,

0:06:41.410,0:06:46.889
potentially be a bit slower, on the metric[br]of

0:06:46.889,0:06:49.530
from moments on the keyboard typing the first[br]characters

0:06:49.530,0:06:52.880
to maybe doing a commit. And that's not what

0:06:52.880,0:06:56.970
encompasses done software. That's just two[br]people coming up

0:06:56.970,0:06:58.570
with the best solution. And you can have other

0:06:58.570,0:07:02.230
pay offs further down the line, such as your

0:07:02.230,0:07:05.940
code is not as buggy. Your code is hopefully

0:07:05.940,0:07:07.930
better-factored because two people are coming[br]up with the

0:07:07.930,0:07:10.639
design versus just one, et cetera, et cetera.[br]So

0:07:10.639,0:07:12.830
I would encourage you to dig deep into why

0:07:12.830,0:07:14.820
you're having these problems, and see if you[br]can

0:07:14.820,0:07:16.880
address those problems. And then try it again,[br]and,

0:07:16.880,0:07:19.440
and measure again. Thank you.

0:07:19.440,0:07:23.139
QUESTION: Just as a, kind of following, my[br]big

0:07:23.139,0:07:26.210
impression is that, in many cases, the tasks[br]are

0:07:26.210,0:07:30.450
relatively straight-forward, and so it just,[br]you know, wouldn't

0:07:30.450,0:07:33.669
take a single person much longer to do them.

0:07:33.669,0:07:33.970
J.M.: Sure.

0:07:33.970,0:07:35.480
QUESTION: And then, so the other person is[br]kind

0:07:35.480,0:07:39.360
of, you know, avoiding, helping avoid typos[br]and, and,

0:07:39.360,0:07:40.919
you know, that sort of thing. But maybe not

0:07:40.919,0:07:42.320
adding as much value as they might be doing.

0:07:42.320,0:07:46.570
J.M.: Right. So we've, we've had clients decide[br]that,

0:07:46.570,0:07:50.350
you know, they measure, you know, we use a

0:07:50.350,0:07:54.930
particular project management tool that lets[br]us estimate stuff.

0:07:54.930,0:07:56.360
And it's called Pivotal Tracker. You don't[br]have to

0:07:56.360,0:07:58.060
use it. Cards on a wall. Whatever works for

0:07:58.060,0:07:59.650
you. So we tend to estimate things sort of

0:07:59.650,0:08:02.770
on like a one to eight scale. And we've

0:08:02.770,0:08:05.300
had clients who have said, after they disengage[br]with

0:08:05.300,0:08:08.010
us, you know, anything that's a zero or a

0:08:08.010,0:08:09.980
one, I guess I should have said zero to

0:08:09.980,0:08:12.030
eight, they choose not to pair on those things,

0:08:12.030,0:08:14.040
cause they find they don't get much value.[br]That's,

0:08:14.040,0:08:15.760
that's great for them. But they have made[br]a

0:08:15.760,0:08:18.630
rule that, well anything that's more of a,[br]than

0:08:18.630,0:08:20.840
a zero to a one on an eight point

0:08:20.840,0:08:23.210
scale, that that must be paired.

0:08:23.210,0:08:25.139
And so then maybe you re-evaluate the twos[br]and

0:08:25.139,0:08:26.900
the threes and then ah, looks like maybe the

0:08:26.900,0:08:29.930
threes, they have, they're, those are getting[br]pretty buggy.

0:08:29.930,0:08:31.960
So let's bring pairing back into that. So[br]that's

0:08:31.960,0:08:33.990
a strategy as well.

0:08:33.990,0:08:35.229
Let's go over here.

0:08:35.229,0:08:37.828
QUESTION: If you could clarify, I have another[br]question,

0:08:37.828,0:08:39.440
but, if you could clarify just for a moment

0:08:39.440,0:08:45.260
that fifteen percent increase, was that compared[br]to one

0:08:45.260,0:08:48.149
developer doing the task? Or was that compared[br]to

0:08:48.149,0:08:50.350
the relative work that two developers would[br]do, you

0:08:50.350,0:08:55.080
know, each individually, right? So, one developer[br]doing a

0:08:55.080,0:08:58.190
task takes this much time. Two developers[br]doing the

0:08:58.190,0:09:01.640
same task takes fifteen percent more time?[br]But then

0:09:01.640,0:09:03.750
that other developer isn't doing any work,[br]right? So

0:09:03.750,0:09:07.670
there's actually less benefit than might,[br]might be-

0:09:07.670,0:09:11.490
J.M.: Right. So the, I believe it was against

0:09:11.490,0:09:12.370
a solo programmer-

0:09:12.370,0:09:12.839
QUESTION: Right.

0:09:12.839,0:09:13.790
J.M.: -working by themselves.

0:09:13.790,0:09:14.270
QUESTION: OK.

0:09:14.270,0:09:16.490
J.M.: But there, you know, but I, there were

0:09:16.490,0:09:19.240
lots of other measures that showed, you know[br]benefit

0:09:19.240,0:09:20.070
of pair programming-

0:09:20.070,0:09:20.480
QUESTION: Sure.

0:09:20.480,0:09:22.460
J.M.: -above, you know, it sort of out, in

0:09:22.460,0:09:25.150
the opinion of the report, outweighed this,[br]this particular

0:09:25.150,0:09:25.990
slow-down.

0:09:25.990,0:09:29.690
QUESTION: So I, I think that kind of plays

0:09:29.690,0:09:32.440
into my, my main question, which was how do

0:09:32.440,0:09:36.560
you quantify to other stake-holders, particularly[br]in the business,

0:09:36.560,0:09:40.540
even other developers, and maybe measure the[br]benefits of

0:09:40.540,0:09:42.960
pair programming? I'm trying to incorporate[br]it into our

0:09:42.960,0:09:47.450
process more, but getting some resistance.[br]We, we've given

0:09:47.450,0:09:50.290
it enough to like experiment with, but how[br]do

0:09:50.290,0:09:52.710
we actually measure the benefits and say whether[br]it's,

0:09:52.710,0:09:53.850
you know, working for us?

0:09:53.850,0:09:56.260
J.M.: That's a great question. Measuring the[br]benefits and

0:09:56.260,0:09:58.330
selling it to management, or your team. Selling[br]it

0:09:58.330,0:10:01.700
to anybody is I, I feel one of the

0:10:01.700,0:10:04.760
hardest things to do. And even when I've been

0:10:04.760,0:10:07.520
going over the empirical evidence, even the[br]empirical evidence

0:10:07.520,0:10:10.080
has said, like, more studies need to be done.

0:10:10.080,0:10:12.750
More sort of metrics for measuring this, this[br]stuff

0:10:12.750,0:10:15.970
needs to, need to be developed.

0:10:15.970,0:10:19.930
It's, it is really, really hard to sell it,

0:10:19.930,0:10:22.990
because the math is just too easy. One plus

0:10:22.990,0:10:27.770
one equals two. You just can't, like, fight[br]that

0:10:27.770,0:10:30.180
math. It's going to be, take twice as long

0:10:30.180,0:10:32.240
and it's gonna be twice as expensive, right?[br]And

0:10:32.240,0:10:34.600
why would anybody ever do that? And I think,

0:10:34.600,0:10:38.620
yeah, and in my experience, you, you know,[br]I

0:10:38.620,0:10:39.830
could, I could, we could try to come up

0:10:39.830,0:10:41.170
with some metrics and we could look at, you

0:10:41.170,0:10:43.020
know, I could point you towards these empirical[br]studies

0:10:43.020,0:10:45.750
and they have particular measures of how they[br]measured,

0:10:45.750,0:10:48.270
you know, different kind of factors. And I,[br]I

0:10:48.270,0:10:51.460
find that stuff it, it bounces off people.[br]You're

0:10:51.460,0:10:53.990
like, ah, yeah, that's all neat. But you've[br]heard

0:10:53.990,0:10:56.890
of one plus one equals two, right?

0:10:56.890,0:10:59.990
And I think that this is an unsatisfying answer

0:10:59.990,0:11:02.410
that I'm about to give you. There's a leap

0:11:02.410,0:11:04.800
of faith that needs to happen, and I think

0:11:04.800,0:11:07.300
you can kind of come back to like, let's

0:11:07.300,0:11:08.510
pretend we're in a world where we can still

0:11:08.510,0:11:13.800
do TDD. In a world where we did TDD,

0:11:13.800,0:11:15.700
that was a leap of faith, too. Because it's

0:11:15.700,0:11:18.279
like, that's twice as long. Why would you,[br]you

0:11:18.279,0:11:20.560
can't test something you haven't written yet.[br]And that's

0:11:20.560,0:11:22.440
gonna take twice as long. And I'm willing[br]to

0:11:22.440,0:11:24.970
bet almost everybody in this room has had[br]that

0:11:24.970,0:11:28.529
argument with somebody who doesn't practice,[br]like, not just

0:11:28.529,0:11:31.839
TDD but any kind of testing. It's too slow

0:11:31.839,0:11:32.600
and it takes twice as long.

0:11:32.600,0:11:34.160
And, finally, you're spouting all this stuff[br]when you're

0:11:34.160,0:11:36.690
talking about all the things that you, make[br]almost,

0:11:36.690,0:11:38.610
I'm willing to bet everybody in this room,[br]love

0:11:38.610,0:11:40.880
testing, to somebody, and it's just bouncing[br]off and

0:11:40.880,0:11:42.950
it's just bouncing off. And finally you're[br]just like,

0:11:42.950,0:11:44.940
ah, you just gotta, you gotta try it. You're

0:11:44.940,0:11:47.160
going to see the benefit, I swear. And then

0:11:47.160,0:11:50.810
finally they do, and usually you win them[br]over.

0:11:50.810,0:11:52.279
But actually, and I'll turn this around, because[br]I

0:11:52.279,0:11:53.540
know that there's lots of people in the audience

0:11:53.540,0:11:57.640
here who have been more on the sales side

0:11:57.640,0:12:01.460
of pair programming than, than I have. Has[br]anybody,

0:12:01.460,0:12:03.770
would anybody like to comment on success stories[br]they

0:12:03.770,0:12:07.800
have had selling management or clients of[br]your consultants

0:12:07.800,0:12:12.610
on how they've addressed this issue? Anybody?[br]Maybe in

0:12:12.610,0:12:17.310
this row here? Could I encourage anybody?[br]Does anybody

0:12:17.310,0:12:19.380
have anything to say? I've got a mobile mic.

0:12:19.380,0:12:23.260
Ah, excellent sir. Don't break your ankle.

0:12:23.260,0:12:24.899
AUDIENCE MEMBER: Hello, hello.

0:12:24.899,0:12:26.540
J.M.: Does that work?

0:12:26.540,0:12:29.820
AUDIENCE MEMBER: So one the, is this working?

0:12:29.820,0:12:30.910
J.M.: Could I get this mic, this hand-held[br]mic

0:12:30.910,0:12:31.320
on?

0:12:31.320,0:12:32.550
V.O.: It's on.

0:12:32.550,0:12:33.790
J.M.: Oh, OK.

0:12:33.790,0:12:35.029
AUDIENCE MEMBER: Hello.

0:12:35.029,0:12:35.850
J.M.: Excellent.

0:12:35.850,0:12:37.500
AUDIENCE MEMBER: That's better.

0:12:37.500,0:12:41.370
One of the easiest ways that I've found to,

0:12:41.370,0:12:43.390
to get pair programming into a team is to

0:12:43.390,0:12:48.980
talk about the benefits of bringing, increasing[br]your ability

0:12:48.980,0:12:52.350
to absorb junior developers into your team.[br]A lot

0:12:52.350,0:12:54.779
of, I'm from San Francisco. A lot of companies

0:12:54.779,0:12:58.350
in San Francisco are hiring their first junior[br]developer.

0:12:58.350,0:13:02.600
Like, right now. And so, one, a lot of

0:13:02.600,0:13:04.360
discussions I've had recently have been along[br]the lines

0:13:04.360,0:13:07.100
of, OK, so we're bringing on our first junior

0:13:07.100,0:13:09.540
developer. Everything we do has to change,[br]because we

0:13:09.540,0:13:12.000
need to vocalize a lot more things that we

0:13:12.000,0:13:14.700
used to. And, so, what I tell them, oftentimes,

0:13:14.700,0:13:16.339
is like, OK, one of the ways you can

0:13:16.339,0:13:19.490
practice that, before the junior developer[br]shows up, is

0:13:19.490,0:13:22.560
by pairing amongst yourselves. Getting used[br]to this idea

0:13:22.560,0:13:25.930
of, like, vocalizing your thought process,[br]understanding how you

0:13:25.930,0:13:28.910
talk about writing code with each other, and[br]then

0:13:28.910,0:13:31.100
you can bring someone in who's in a very

0:13:31.100,0:13:33.770
different place, and you'll be better-equipped[br]to talk to

0:13:33.770,0:13:34.750
them about it.

0:13:34.750,0:13:38.589
J.M.: Thanks a lot. Thank you so much.

0:13:38.589,0:13:39.870
Excellent. So, go ahead.

0:13:39.870,0:13:42.750
AUDIENCE MEMBER: I had two things to say.[br]Part

0:13:42.750,0:13:44.950
of like, selling pair programming, like, for[br]me, as

0:13:44.950,0:13:48.470
a developer, it's been really awesome, just[br]cause it

0:13:48.470,0:13:50.160
forces you to get out of your own box

0:13:50.160,0:13:51.950
of thinking and see how other people think[br]about

0:13:51.950,0:13:54.700
writing code and sort of, like, maybe you[br]thought

0:13:54.700,0:13:56.529
this one practice of how to do something was

0:13:56.529,0:13:57.899
bad because you got bitten by it once, but

0:13:57.899,0:14:00.540
maybe you can be convinced that, oh, no that's

0:14:00.540,0:14:03.220
actually worth doing. It's a great way to[br]like

0:14:03.220,0:14:05.480
just share knowledge about gems that someone[br]found on

0:14:05.480,0:14:07.310
another project if you're coming into something.

0:14:07.310,0:14:09.560
And then, like, to the junior developer point,[br]like

0:14:09.560,0:14:11.450
it's great cause you're there and you know,[br]you

0:14:11.450,0:14:13.120
ask, have you seen this part of the code

0:14:13.120,0:14:15.420
yet? No? Then you go through and you explain,

0:14:15.420,0:14:17.560
like, everything about it, cause you, you[br]know, have,

0:14:17.560,0:14:21.550
you write it and you can, or you understand

0:14:21.550,0:14:23.160
it, and so that helps bring them in more

0:14:23.160,0:14:24.769
than just sort of looking through all this[br]code

0:14:24.769,0:14:26.370
that may not have comments or was written[br]by

0:14:26.370,0:14:29.649
someone who left the company later. So those[br]are

0:14:29.649,0:14:32.279
my, like, big selling points. Like, I think[br]it's

0:14:32.279,0:14:35.940
made me much better and much more open minded

0:14:35.940,0:14:38.740
developer, and like, made it much easier for[br]me

0:14:38.740,0:14:41.990
to collaborate, which yields, I think, like[br]better code,

0:14:41.990,0:14:46.029
and like, you know, over all makes your, your

0:14:46.029,0:14:46.339
group better cause you're just better at collaborating[br]and

0:14:46.339,0:14:49.200
sharing ideas. And it sort of tears down the

0:14:49.200,0:14:54.019
barriers of like worrying about, about bumping[br]shoulders in

0:14:54.019,0:14:54.050
communication.

0:14:54.050,0:14:55.250
We'll get kind of heated, like you said, like

0:14:55.250,0:14:59.940
and we'll just get through it, and in the,

0:14:59.940,0:15:03.820
in the end come to an agreement on what

0:15:03.820,0:15:04.920
will hopefully be a better idea or revisit[br]it

0:15:04.920,0:15:08.209
My question was kind of around pair rotation.[br]So,

0:15:08.209,0:15:10.209
like, if you're working on, on a team in

0:15:10.209,0:15:12.350
an office or, we work with one of, we

0:15:12.350,0:15:15.130
work with the clients' developers separately,[br]like remote pairing,

0:15:15.130,0:15:17.519
like we'll spin up an EC2 instance and we're

0:15:17.519,0:15:19.510
trying to sort of figure out, like, proper[br]pair

0:15:19.510,0:15:23.000
rotations, so like, on a particular feature,[br]two developers

0:15:23.000,0:15:25.540
won't be the only ones like, who work on

0:15:25.540,0:15:28.160
it, know it, and make, like, to some extent

0:15:28.160,0:15:31.290
make all the decisions. And I'm curious, like,[br]what

0:15:31.290,0:15:34.769
your thoughts are on that, and like sort of,

0:15:34.769,0:15:36.779
what you have found to be a good way

0:15:36.779,0:15:37.260
of pair rotation, if, if you've practiced[br]that at

0:15:37.260,0:15:37.470
all.

0:15:37.470,0:15:37.899
J.M.: Sure.

0:15:37.899,0:15:39.200
AUDIENCE MEMBER: And things like that.

0:15:39.200,0:15:43.149
J.M.: Yeah. Absolutely. So pair rotation.[br]Super important. I

0:15:43.149,0:15:46.600
think, several things can help encourage pair[br]rotation. So

0:15:46.600,0:15:49.260
one, yes, we do rotate pairs on a regular

0:15:49.260,0:15:53.470
basis. There are extremes to this. There's[br]something called,

0:15:53.470,0:15:56.070
I've never done this, but it's been dubbed[br]promiscuous

0:15:56.070,0:15:57.269
pairing. I don't know if anybody has heard[br]of

0:15:57.269,0:16:00.610
this. And it's where you pair many times per

0:16:00.610,0:16:03.279
day, like, on a timer basically. And there's[br]been

0:16:03.279,0:16:06.600
a little bit of evidence to show that that

0:16:06.600,0:16:09.300
can be very productive. It's also shown to[br]be

0:16:09.300,0:16:13.050
disruptive and exhausting. So I think that,[br]give it

0:16:13.050,0:16:15.920
a, give it a try, perhaps.

0:16:15.920,0:16:17.790
But for us, for practical purposes, what we[br]tend

0:16:17.790,0:16:21.950
to do is, it, it ties into the art

0:16:21.950,0:16:25.050
of breaking down work. So we call our, the

0:16:25.050,0:16:28.459
stuff we're working on, we call them stories.[br]And

0:16:28.459,0:16:30.370
we've gotten quite good at being able to break

0:16:30.370,0:16:34.930
down deliverable stories to small enough pieces.[br]This is

0:16:34.930,0:16:37.470
all, in almost every case. To small enough[br]pieces

0:16:37.470,0:16:40.329
that, ideally, our pair developers will be[br]able to

0:16:40.329,0:16:42.160
get one or two of them done per day.

0:16:42.160,0:16:45.610
And a long story, we'll say a big story,

0:16:45.610,0:16:47.209
that's gonna take a long time, quote on quote

0:16:47.209,0:16:50.950
long, that might be several days. Two days,[br]maybe.

0:16:50.950,0:16:51.920
Three days.

0:16:51.920,0:16:54.779
So what I'm not saying is, this is going

0:16:54.779,0:16:56.880
to take three weeks to do. Now, maybe there

0:16:56.880,0:16:58.950
is a giant track of features, a huge feature

0:16:58.950,0:17:01.490
set - the entire profile page rewrite. That[br]might

0:17:01.490,0:17:04.750
be weeks of work. But getting that link photo

0:17:04.750,0:17:08.148
upload thing, just that small thing, that[br]might be

0:17:08.148,0:17:10.339
a day's worth of work or less. And so

0:17:10.339,0:17:13.019
we tend to rotate pairs every day, if we

0:17:13.019,0:17:17.140
can, at our morning stand up meeting. And,[br]because

0:17:17.140,0:17:19.779
ideally people will have completed one or[br]two things

0:17:19.779,0:17:21.749
the previous day and they're, they're ready[br]to move

0:17:21.749,0:17:23.189
on. And if they're not, and if they didn't

0:17:23.189,0:17:26.259
complete it, there's, like, just a little[br]bit left,

0:17:26.259,0:17:27.249
and you could wrap it up with a new

0:17:27.249,0:17:30.359
pair the next day and, and go on from

0:17:30.359,0:17:31.509
there.

0:17:31.509,0:17:33.980
What will happen, sometimes, is that pairs[br]will request

0:17:33.980,0:17:36.039
to stick, we call it. We're working on this

0:17:36.039,0:17:37.269
thing, it's really long. We have a lot of

0:17:37.269,0:17:39.700
context. We'd like to stick on this. OK, second,

0:17:39.700,0:17:42.350
you know, that's the next day. Cool. Then[br]the,

0:17:42.350,0:17:44.200
you know, the third day comes around. Like,[br]we

0:17:44.200,0:17:47.419
still. We're almost done. We'd like to stick.[br]And

0:17:47.419,0:17:52.629
the whole team collectively is like, hmm.[br]Maybe. OK.

0:17:52.629,0:17:56.600
Maybe. OK. Go ahead.

0:17:56.600,0:17:59.950
Fourth day rolls around. We're really almost[br]done, I

0:17:59.950,0:18:01.799
swear. And then at that point, like we, as

0:18:01.799,0:18:04.090
a group, agree as a team collectively, like,[br]we

0:18:04.090,0:18:06.399
should get somebody else in. Often, at that[br]point,

0:18:06.399,0:18:09.019
the pair will say, one of us is gonna

0:18:09.019,0:18:12.039
swap out. You know, Bob's gonna stay on. Let's

0:18:12.039,0:18:15.299
get, who's available? Sally, you're available.[br]Jump in. Fresh

0:18:15.299,0:18:18.080
pair of eyes. They're probably stuck. You[br]need a

0:18:18.080,0:18:21.529
new perspective. And so we will force rotation[br]that

0:18:21.529,0:18:23.559
way, too. And just maybe taking it a step

0:18:23.559,0:18:26.149
further, something that will often come up[br]after this

0:18:26.149,0:18:28.629
is, yeah, we rotate very often, but it's kind

0:18:28.629,0:18:30.440
of like the same people, like. We're the same

0:18:30.440,0:18:31.450
people on the time and kind of the same

0:18:31.450,0:18:34.029
four people just kind of, like, go around[br]and

0:18:34.029,0:18:36.049
around and around, what you can do to combat

0:18:36.049,0:18:38.690
that kind of a situation, where there's, there's[br]rotation,

0:18:38.690,0:18:41.080
but it's not balanced amongst the entire team,[br]is

0:18:41.080,0:18:43.129
you can just start tracking it. Just, you[br]could

0:18:43.129,0:18:45.019
do a white board. Like, keeping track of who's

0:18:45.019,0:18:47.379
paired with who how many times, all the way

0:18:47.379,0:18:50.950
to, there's even a website called pair tricks,[br]I

0:18:50.950,0:18:53.960
believe. Where you can sign up your company[br]and,

0:18:53.960,0:18:55.049
and you can put all the pairs in and

0:18:55.049,0:18:57.720
it'll randomly assign people and do weighting[br]based on

0:18:57.720,0:18:59.679
how long, how long it's been since they've[br]paired

0:18:59.679,0:19:00.669
and things like that, but.

0:19:00.669,0:19:02.889
So you can do something like that, like, every,

0:19:02.889,0:19:04.629
or just keep track of it on a white

0:19:04.629,0:19:06.600
board or a Google doc or something like that.

0:19:06.600,0:19:07.549
K. Good questions.

0:19:07.549,0:19:09.799
AUDIENCE MEMBER: Kind of a follow-up to that.

0:19:09.799,0:19:10.419
H.M.: Sure.

0:19:10.419,0:19:13.289
AUDIENCE MEMBER: How do you combine that with,[br]like,

0:19:13.289,0:19:16.320
sort of junior developers, like, sort of making[br]sure

0:19:16.320,0:19:18.489
that they're not going through so much context-switching[br]that

0:19:18.489,0:19:20.109
they're not really getting anything out of[br]it, they're

0:19:20.109,0:19:21.679
just sort of starting a feature and then,[br]like,

0:19:21.679,0:19:23.590
you know. So like, in our case, we'll start

0:19:23.590,0:19:24.749
something and it won't, won't be done in one

0:19:24.749,0:19:27.289
day, and then sort of, they'll switch and[br]it's

0:19:27.289,0:19:30.700
just kind of like, well like, I'm kind of

0:19:30.700,0:19:32.019
like lost. Like I-

0:19:32.019,0:19:33.100
J.M.: Right. Right.

0:19:33.100,0:19:34.330
AUDIENCE MEMBER: I was barely beginning to[br]grasp, like-

0:19:34.330,0:19:34.340
J.M.: Sure.

0:19:34.340,0:19:35.639
AUDIENCE MEMBER: -that part of the code that[br]I

0:19:35.639,0:19:36.419
was working on.

0:19:36.419,0:19:38.710
J.M.: So I think just being flexible, you[br]know,

0:19:38.710,0:19:40.830
just because it's nine o'clock the next day[br]doesn't

0:19:40.830,0:19:43.200
mean that, you know, the judge comes in and,

0:19:43.200,0:19:44.799
you know, breaks everybody up or something[br]like that.

0:19:44.799,0:19:46.720
And I think that if, if the team decides,

0:19:46.720,0:19:49.859
you know, hey, it seems like this junior developer,

0:19:49.859,0:19:51.879
they're three-quarters of the way, the, the[br]senior and

0:19:51.879,0:19:54.919
junior developer, they're three-quarters of[br]the way through this

0:19:54.919,0:19:58.330
task. They're trying to complete, yeah. Let[br]them. Let

0:19:58.330,0:20:01.359
them complete the task. And, because they're[br]gonna get

0:20:01.359,0:20:02.840
a lot of benefit out of seeing it from

0:20:02.840,0:20:03.779
beginning to end.

0:20:03.779,0:20:07.580
So don't be, I'm personally an advocate of[br]just

0:20:07.580,0:20:08.859
kind of playing it by ear. Just kind of

0:20:08.859,0:20:11.200
seeing how it works out. Don't be so strict

0:20:11.200,0:20:14.850
that you're being too disruptive, but don't[br]be so,

0:20:14.850,0:20:16.919
don't let people stick so long that you get

0:20:16.919,0:20:19.859
these little sort of knowledge cylos and ownership[br]and

0:20:19.859,0:20:20.700
such. Great.

0:20:20.700,0:20:22.369
AUDIENCE MEMBER: Thank you.

0:20:22.369,0:20:23.200
J.M.: Sure.

0:20:23.200,0:20:26.519
AUDIENCE MEMBER: A few questions on, I guess,[br]team

0:20:26.519,0:20:29.149
dynamics with pairing. This one's kind of[br]a follow

0:20:29.149,0:20:29.749
onto this one.

0:20:29.749,0:20:30.009
J.M.: Sure.

0:20:30.009,0:20:31.210
AUDIENCE MEMBER: I guess I'll spit them all[br]out.

0:20:31.210,0:20:31.749
J.M.: Go for it.

0:20:31.749,0:20:32.549
AUDIENCE MEMBER: Monopolize things a little.

0:20:32.549,0:20:34.259
One is, do you have any thoughts on, if

0:20:34.259,0:20:38.999
you have a group of, a spectrum of people

0:20:38.999,0:20:41.600
at different experience levels, are, can you[br]talk about

0:20:41.600,0:20:44.899
sort of the pros and cons of going with,

0:20:44.899,0:20:47.549
like, senior senior, junior, junior, people[br]at like levels,

0:20:47.549,0:20:51.289
or to go junior senior to get more mentoring.

0:20:51.289,0:20:54.429
Have you had any barriers with tools, where[br]people

0:20:54.429,0:20:56.889
just would be incompatible, say one guy likes[br]Vim

0:20:56.889,0:21:01.139
and one guy likes Sublime? And then, thirdly,[br]do

0:21:01.139,0:21:05.970
you have any, any wisdom to share on adding

0:21:05.970,0:21:09.139
a test or QA person to a pair to

0:21:09.139,0:21:11.799
get that person involved early in what role[br]a,

0:21:11.799,0:21:15.639
a QA engineer would play throughout a, a,[br]working

0:21:15.639,0:21:17.179
on a story with a pair.

0:21:17.179,0:21:19.600
J.M.: OK. I may have to refer back to

0:21:19.600,0:21:21.009
you to remind me what all those are. But

0:21:21.009,0:21:27.340
I believe they were, experience level pairings,[br]tool conflicts,

0:21:27.340,0:21:29.009
and adding, like, a QA or a support person

0:21:29.009,0:21:29.649
to the team.

0:21:29.649,0:21:34.239
So let's do, let's do experience level pairings.[br]I,

0:21:34.239,0:21:37.019
I like, personally, I don't, I don't consider[br]it

0:21:37.019,0:21:40.850
being a big deal to mix up almost any

0:21:40.850,0:21:47.529
kind of experience level pairs. Except the[br]junior-junior situation.

0:21:47.529,0:21:50.109
I wouldn't just randomly, personally, do that.[br]So the

0:21:50.109,0:21:55.239
obviously one is senior and junior. Those[br]can be

0:21:55.239,0:21:57.570
great pairings, right. Just, especially for[br]the junior person.

0:21:57.570,0:21:59.739
And that, maybe, a lot of people talk about

0:21:59.739,0:22:02.200
pairing and say, oh, you know, we pair when

0:22:02.200,0:22:04.220
we're wrapping somebody up. And they'll kind[br]of use

0:22:04.220,0:22:06.340
that as the only excuse for pairing. You know,

0:22:06.340,0:22:08.470
we're wrapping up this junior person.

0:22:08.470,0:22:10.840
But, that can put a lot of burden on

0:22:10.840,0:22:13.419
the senior person. If they're always ramping[br]somebody up.

0:22:13.419,0:22:14.330
You know, if they're, if you get a new

0:22:14.330,0:22:17.200
person every so often, then they're, if they're[br]a

0:22:17.200,0:22:18.850
senior person they might feel like they're[br]always wrapping

0:22:18.850,0:22:21.229
somebody up. I'm gonna encourage everybody[br]to have the

0:22:21.229,0:22:24.220
attitude of, well, one, share, share the load.[br]Like,

0:22:24.220,0:22:26.100
the junior person shouldn't just stick with[br]the same

0:22:26.100,0:22:28.720
person all the time. And also have the attitude,

0:22:28.720,0:22:30.470
if you're a senior person, or have your senior

0:22:30.470,0:22:32.970
people have the attitude that, they can always[br]learn

0:22:32.970,0:22:33.619
the junior person.

0:22:33.619,0:22:36.080
On the last project I was on, you know,

0:22:36.080,0:22:41.669
I've been doing software development for sixteen[br]years. And

0:22:41.669,0:22:43.109
I was pairing with a guy who was fresh

0:22:43.109,0:22:44.850
out of college. And he didn't even have a

0:22:44.850,0:22:46.539
CS degree or anything. He was just, well,[br]you

0:22:46.539,0:22:48.210
know, one of those smart people who just graduated

0:22:48.210,0:22:49.929
from college, and he was doing something that[br]was

0:22:49.929,0:22:51.970
clearly way below his skill level. We're like,[br]you

0:22:51.970,0:22:56.259
should probably do some programming. Here,[br]get over here.

0:22:56.259,0:22:58.279
And, I learned something new from him every[br]single

0:22:58.279,0:23:02.460
day. You know, and I, the supposed expert,[br]and

0:23:02.460,0:23:04.279
everyday he's like, oh, did you know about[br]this?

0:23:04.279,0:23:07.070
Whoa. No. That's really cool. I would usually[br]write

0:23:07.070,0:23:09.269
it down. I kept trying to keep track of

0:23:09.269,0:23:11.320
the things I learned each day. And then people

0:23:11.320,0:23:15.269
at the same experience level, that's, that's[br]great as

0:23:15.269,0:23:17.269
well. You do sometimes have to watch out for

0:23:17.269,0:23:21.109
people, especially senior, senior people,[br]who maybe, let's say

0:23:21.109,0:23:26.049
they once had the word architect on their[br]names.

0:23:26.049,0:23:28.970
Sometimes people are gonna be extremely opinionated[br]and not

0:23:28.970,0:23:31.289
want to budge from ideas. It's something to[br]watch

0:23:31.289,0:23:35.139
out for. People kind of, we call it thrashing.

0:23:35.139,0:23:37.429
Junior-junior. Should you ever pair junior[br]people together? And

0:23:37.429,0:23:41.019
I think the answer is sometimes yes. Especially[br]if

0:23:41.019,0:23:44.129
they've both been through multiple, been through[br]multiple pair

0:23:44.129,0:23:46.429
rotations. They're kind of, maybe one of them[br]has

0:23:46.429,0:23:48.029
kind of been on that, let's make up the

0:23:48.029,0:23:50.409
user, new user profile rewrite or something[br]like that.

0:23:50.409,0:23:52.259
And that junior person has kind of bounced[br]between

0:23:52.259,0:23:54.479
pairs, all kind of in that area. And they're

0:23:54.479,0:23:56.590
kind of getting pretty good at learning some[br]stuff.

0:23:56.590,0:23:58.619
It might be good to swap in and have

0:23:58.619,0:24:01.690
a junior person who doesn't have any experience[br]in

0:24:01.690,0:24:05.570
that area pair with this newbie but newbie[br]with

0:24:05.570,0:24:08.419
a lot of context. And then you can really

0:24:08.419,0:24:10.950
help them exercise what it's like to have[br]them

0:24:10.950,0:24:13.169
own something. You know, own's a bad word.[br]But

0:24:13.169,0:24:15.379
whatever. You know what I mean.

0:24:15.379,0:24:17.119
Tre- you know, bringing this other person[br]up to

0:24:17.119,0:24:20.369
speed. Transferring that context. And it,[br]I've always found

0:24:20.369,0:24:23.769
it amazing how, when I feel like I don't

0:24:23.769,0:24:25.529
really know anything and I'm really relying[br]on this

0:24:25.529,0:24:27.820
other person, and suddenly the person I'm[br]relying on

0:24:27.820,0:24:29.690
kind of drops off, and I have to explain

0:24:29.690,0:24:32.700
it to somebody else, it really forces me,[br]personally,

0:24:32.700,0:24:35.349
to dig deep, understand the problem much better.[br]And

0:24:35.349,0:24:37.690
I almost always surprise myself, both in how[br]much

0:24:37.690,0:24:40.700
I actually do know, and how much I don't

0:24:40.700,0:24:41.720
know.

0:24:41.720,0:24:44.320
So, once in awhile, having those junior people[br]pair

0:24:44.320,0:24:48.820
up and, and yes, struggle, like, have problems.[br]Have

0:24:48.820,0:24:50.450
to figure some stuff out, the way we all

0:24:50.450,0:24:52.909
used to have to do when we were working

0:24:52.909,0:24:54.479
by ourselves. OK. So that was a lot of

0:24:54.479,0:24:56.679
that stuff.

0:24:56.679,0:25:01.399
Tools. Wow. If you could see the email threads

0:25:01.399,0:25:04.729
go around at our company, these guys know.[br]These

0:25:04.729,0:25:09.739
guys know. Key bindings. Tools. Vim versus[br]RubyMine versus,

0:25:09.739,0:25:16.679
versus Sublime versus TextMate versus frikin'[br]Decorak. I mean,

0:25:16.679,0:25:20.210
give me a break. Come on people.

0:25:20.210,0:25:22.749
Yeah. That, that's, that's, it's a, it can[br]be

0:25:22.749,0:25:26.139
a huge struggle. And you can go to an

0:25:26.139,0:25:28.700
extreme, that I don't really know of anybody[br]else

0:25:28.700,0:25:31.070
doing. Maybe some of you do this. I don't

0:25:31.070,0:25:34.460
know. But we pretty much standardize on a[br]particular

0:25:34.460,0:25:37.519
kind of keybinding, and often an editor. It,[br]it

0:25:37.519,0:25:40.379
evolves. It isn't like, the manager doesn't[br]come down

0:25:40.379,0:25:43.970
and say, today we're a Vim company. The, the

0:25:43.970,0:25:48.169
team ends up, you know, adopting, and the[br]people

0:25:48.169,0:25:51.529
who are kind of holding onto those other texts,

0:25:51.529,0:25:53.979
they inevitably kind of like, OK, fine. Fine,[br]I'll

0:25:53.979,0:25:55.649
do it. And I did that, because I used

0:25:55.649,0:25:57.389
to work out of the San Francisco office. Now

0:25:57.389,0:25:58.700
I'm working out of the New York office. And

0:25:58.700,0:26:01.200
they use different tool sets. It just evolved[br]that

0:26:01.200,0:26:03.889
way. And rather than stomp that out, we've[br]let,

0:26:03.889,0:26:06.129
we've let it evolve. And it's been great.

0:26:06.129,0:26:07.889
My advice on that front would at least be

0:26:07.889,0:26:11.869
this. One, be open to learning new things.[br]Two,

0:26:11.869,0:26:14.200
if you have your super awesome custom setup[br]that's

0:26:14.200,0:26:17.359
just for you, and your own, your precious,[br]Vim

0:26:17.359,0:26:21.009
bindings, don't stomp the defaults. Because[br]maybe that person

0:26:21.009,0:26:23.669
who doesn't really know Vim very well, they[br]might

0:26:23.669,0:26:25.840
at, or, or RubyMine or whatever your editor[br]or

0:26:25.840,0:26:28.039
tool of choice is, they may not know your

0:26:28.039,0:26:29.999
thing. But they may know kind of enough of

0:26:29.999,0:26:32.619
the default settings, that they can kind of[br]get

0:26:32.619,0:26:35.389
around and maybe, maybe they start adopting[br]yours. Or

0:26:35.389,0:26:37.229
maybe they say, yeah, I don't really use that

0:26:37.229,0:26:39.679
key binding for this, I use it for something

0:26:39.679,0:26:42.789
else. And, and be open for that. But people

0:26:42.789,0:26:48.609
can sometimes be too closed minded about,[br]you know,

0:26:48.609,0:26:52.580
they build this little ecosystem just for[br]themselves, and,

0:26:52.580,0:26:54.869
and not want to, to change, and I encourage

0:26:54.869,0:26:57.409
people be open to change, but leave the defaults.

0:26:57.409,0:26:59.970
And be open to trying other stuff. But there's

0:26:59.970,0:27:03.359
no silver bullet unless you mandate, our office[br]is

0:27:03.359,0:27:07.679
an X office and everybody just learn it.

0:27:07.679,0:27:11.639
OK. Integrating other people into the team.[br]Like, QA

0:27:11.639,0:27:14.039
folks. And if you don't mind, I'll sort of

0:27:14.039,0:27:19.159
mutate that question into pairing across different[br]disciplines, or

0:27:19.159,0:27:21.220
integrating anybody of any other discipline[br]into the pairing

0:27:21.220,0:27:24.239
structure. I'm a big fan of that. Be it

0:27:24.239,0:27:27.809
a QA person, design people, design, you know,[br]front

0:27:27.809,0:27:31.389
end design or visual design, designers. Even[br]your product

0:27:31.389,0:27:34.749
owners, product managers, whatever you want[br]to call them.

0:27:34.749,0:27:36.509
I think that that's great. One, it builds[br]up

0:27:36.509,0:27:39.009
a lot of empathy. Just from a person to

0:27:39.009,0:27:41.409
person point of view. Two, it can be super

0:27:41.409,0:27:45.179
practical, especially with, say, visual design.[br]And, and actually

0:27:45.179,0:27:48.519
QA as well. Like, that last mile, I've always

0:27:48.519,0:27:51.409
found, of say a visual design, where, you[br]know,

0:27:51.409,0:27:52.729
you've pretty much got all the assets in.[br]Let's

0:27:52.729,0:27:53.960
say you're building a web page. Got all the

0:27:53.960,0:27:58.229
assets in and you're, you're tweaking the[br]css, and

0:27:58.229,0:27:59.999
all the stuff that came from visual design,[br]it's

0:27:59.999,0:28:02.830
pretty good right now, but you know that field,

0:28:02.830,0:28:04.619
or that area of the page that looked great

0:28:04.619,0:28:07.519
with lorem ipsum, that only had like twenty-five[br]characters.

0:28:07.519,0:28:09.629
If somebody puts in a thousand characters,[br]and they

0:28:09.629,0:28:13.840
can, the whole thing goes blah. Right? Crazy.

0:28:13.840,0:28:17.109
Getting visual design in to say, hey, like,[br]the,

0:28:17.109,0:28:19.979
the last bit, let's just sit here and work

0:28:19.979,0:28:22.080
on this. And then you can just, especially[br]if

0:28:22.080,0:28:23.440
you're using, like, web, if you're doing web[br]development,

0:28:23.440,0:28:25.349
and you can literally tweak it right there[br]on

0:28:25.349,0:28:27.840
the screen together. That could be super powerful.[br]And

0:28:27.840,0:28:30.879
I've even been in situations where you'll,[br]they were

0:28:30.879,0:28:33.149
so good that they were working on this thing

0:28:33.149,0:28:34.889
and were like, moving stuff around. They're[br]like, ah,

0:28:34.889,0:28:36.929
now that we've moved this from here to here,

0:28:36.929,0:28:40.219
those icons look terrible. Hold on, and they're[br]like,

0:28:40.219,0:28:42.200
somehow spew out an icon out of their fingertips.

0:28:42.200,0:28:44.299
And they're like, OK, now pull in this icon.

0:28:44.299,0:28:46.999
And wow, it's just. It's like the most rapid

0:28:46.999,0:28:50.669
changing finalization wrapping up of, of something[br]I've ever

0:28:50.669,0:28:52.529
worked in, and that was one of the best

0:28:52.529,0:28:53.909
experiences I've ever had pairing was with[br]this person

0:28:53.909,0:28:59.710
who was not technically a software developer.

0:28:59.710,0:29:02.039
QA, as well. I think, like, a really good

0:29:02.039,0:29:04.999
QA person is worth their weight in, in gold.

0:29:04.999,0:29:07.309
I think if anybody here is kind of tied

0:29:07.309,0:29:11.149
into the capital A Agile community, or at[br]least

0:29:11.149,0:29:14.840
extreme programming, you know, somehow this[br]strange notion came

0:29:14.840,0:29:17.799
up that, like, you don't need QA. We've got

0:29:17.799,0:29:20.649
tests for that. And it's like, nah. Those[br]are

0:29:20.649,0:29:23.239
two different things. So, integrating QA people[br]can be

0:29:23.239,0:29:26.249
really good, especially if you're, if they're[br]in a

0:29:26.249,0:29:28.690
mode of, maybe you've got a big release coming

0:29:28.690,0:29:32.460
up, and they're hammering the site and finding[br]all

0:29:32.460,0:29:36.580
these bugs, and you know, pairing with them[br]as

0:29:36.580,0:29:40.279
you're fixing the bugs, as they're like pressing,[br]you

0:29:40.279,0:29:42.580
know, trying all their different attacks on[br]the system.

0:29:42.580,0:29:44.320
They're saying, OK, well you fixed that one,[br]but

0:29:44.320,0:29:46.099
that makes me think of this other thing. Oh,

0:29:46.099,0:29:48.149
look. It's broken. OK. Try this. Try this.[br]And

0:29:48.149,0:29:53.419
just, like, just kind of, you know, purpose,[br]purposeful

0:29:53.419,0:29:56.460
pairing when it's needed can be super valuable[br]as

0:29:56.460,0:29:56.960
well.

0:29:56.960,0:30:01.239
Now I haven't, say, just, you know, like,[br]where,

0:30:01.239,0:30:03.440
hey, we're making an android application and[br]today I'm

0:30:03.440,0:30:06.219
doing some, you know, a big feature, and it

0:30:06.219,0:30:09.460
just pair with a QA person instead of another

0:30:09.460,0:30:11.609
software developer, in the middle or at the[br]beginning

0:30:11.609,0:30:15.009
of the development process. I haven't done[br]that. But

0:30:15.009,0:30:15.759
give it a shot.

0:30:15.759,0:30:19.489
All right. That was three. I hope they were

0:30:19.489,0:30:20.119
good. Cool.

0:30:20.119,0:30:23.129
AUDIENCE MEMBER: Quick comment about the cross-tooling,

0:30:23.129,0:30:23.559
or cross-editor,

0:30:23.559,0:30:29.989
there's a tool called Floobits - F-L-O-O bits,[br]which

0:30:29.989,0:30:32.349
lets your Vim people work with your Emacs[br]people,

0:30:32.349,0:30:34.629
and the idea is, like, one of them's got

0:30:34.629,0:30:36.179
their computer and the other one's got their[br]computer,

0:30:36.179,0:30:37.840
and they're each running the same damn thing,[br]but

0:30:37.840,0:30:40.899
it's all synced and good and there's a fall

0:30:40.899,0:30:43.580
back, which is like a diff shipper for other

0:30:43.580,0:30:44.210
apps. So it's-

0:30:44.210,0:30:45.049
J.M.: OK. Cool. Floobits.

0:30:45.049,0:30:45.669
AUDIENCE MEMBER: Yeah.

0:30:45.669,0:30:47.200
J.M.: I've heard of it. I haven't, well, I

0:30:47.200,0:30:48.649
did, I technically did try it when it was

0:30:48.649,0:30:50.749
early. And it didn't really work very well,[br]but

0:30:50.749,0:30:51.679
I'm gonna try it again, cause people-

0:30:51.679,0:30:52.989
AUDIENCE MEMBER: Yeah. It's, it's still-

0:30:52.989,0:30:54.979
AUDIENCE MEMBER: -fairly early, I think. But[br]the promise

0:30:54.979,0:30:57.509
is there and more plugins would probably help[br]it.

0:30:57.509,0:30:58.049
But.

0:30:58.049,0:30:59.129
J.M.: Excellent.

0:30:59.129,0:31:01.899
AUDIENCE MEMBER: So, a couple questions. One,[br]when you're

0:31:01.899,0:31:04.739
driving, how much vocalization do you do to[br]the

0:31:04.739,0:31:07.469
other person explaining your thoughts? And[br]the other one

0:31:07.469,0:31:11.399
is, when you've got a senior developer paired[br]with

0:31:11.399,0:31:14.999
a junior developer, there's, you know, I frequently[br]find,

0:31:14.999,0:31:17.309
I'm the senior one on this side. And there's,

0:31:17.309,0:31:20.669
I know I need to let them work through

0:31:20.669,0:31:22.169
it, but at the same time I want to

0:31:22.169,0:31:23.379
rip it out of their hands and type it,

0:31:23.379,0:31:24.029
you know, it's like, how-

0:31:24.029,0:31:24.419
J.M.: It's hard.

0:31:24.419,0:31:26.029
AUDIENCE MEMBER: -what tools do you, techniques[br]do you

0:31:26.029,0:31:28.349
use to combat that and work with that and

0:31:28.349,0:31:29.989
help them to learn?

0:31:29.989,0:31:32.549
J.M.: Sure. So, the first question was. Wow,[br]this

0:31:32.549,0:31:35.589
is really terrible. What was the first question[br]again?

0:31:35.589,0:31:36.929
AUDIENCE MEMBER: Vocalization.

0:31:36.929,0:31:41.549
J.M.: Vocalization. Yes. Ironically. So vocalization[br]and then being

0:31:41.549,0:31:43.219
a keyboard hog, right? I'm that, like, I'll,[br]I'll,

0:31:43.219,0:31:44.769
I'll take on a trip with that one. Cause

0:31:44.769,0:31:46.169
I'm, I can be that way.

0:31:46.169,0:31:49.820
Or, at least, letting new people struggle[br]through something

0:31:49.820,0:31:52.419
when you already know the answer, for example.

0:31:52.419,0:31:55.460
Vocalization. I vocalize a lot. Especially[br]because I do

0:31:55.460,0:31:58.009
remote pair programming. And I lose a lot[br]of

0:31:58.009,0:32:01.489
the, a lot of the visual cues and physical

0:32:01.489,0:32:04.149
cues that you might pick up sitting side-by-side.[br]I

0:32:04.149,0:32:06.619
lose a lot of those. So, when my whole

0:32:06.619,0:32:09.749
view into somebody is from, say, the neck[br]up,

0:32:09.749,0:32:12.279
you know, or like the midsection up, it's[br]harder

0:32:12.279,0:32:14.739
for me to say, see anybody's hands. I almost

0:32:14.739,0:32:16.820
never see anybody's hands. So are they reaching[br]for

0:32:16.820,0:32:18.609
the keyboard right now? Are they reaching[br]for the

0:32:18.609,0:32:20.979
mouse? Are their hands on their laps? You[br]know,

0:32:20.979,0:32:21.999
what are they about - are they about to

0:32:21.999,0:32:23.450
do something? I don't really know. Well like,[br]when

0:32:23.450,0:32:26.019
you pair side by side, and out of, you

0:32:26.019,0:32:27.320
know, right now I can still kind of see

0:32:27.320,0:32:29.489
you over there. And if I see this hand

0:32:29.489,0:32:31.309
going out then that's a cue for me to

0:32:31.309,0:32:32.629
be like, oh, it looks like they want to

0:32:32.629,0:32:34.639
do something. I wasn't in the middle of doing

0:32:34.639,0:32:37.109
something, so I'll kind of back off.

0:32:37.109,0:32:41.619
So, maybe a little bit less verbalization,[br]consciously verbalizing,

0:32:41.619,0:32:45.570
anyway. But, when I'm remote, I'm constantly[br]saying things

0:32:45.570,0:32:47.229
like, I'm gonna grab the mouse. Can I look

0:32:47.229,0:32:49.119
at this? Would you like to drive? Do you

0:32:49.119,0:32:51.249
mind if I drive? All that kind of stuff.

0:32:51.249,0:32:54.109
And, you know, to the point where, I've pair

0:32:54.109,0:32:56.759
programmed with, remote paired with people,[br]and they've told

0:32:56.759,0:32:59.809
me later that they, they found themselves[br]doing that

0:32:59.809,0:33:03.779
much more when they were pairing side by side,

0:33:03.779,0:33:06.669
and they felt it made them a better programmer,

0:33:06.669,0:33:09.210
or a better pair anyway, because they found[br]themselves

0:33:09.210,0:33:11.820
being more vocal even when they were in person.

0:33:11.820,0:33:14.019
Which was, which I thought was great.

0:33:14.019,0:33:16.299
AUDIENCE MEMBER: What about vocalizing, like,[br]OK, now I'm

0:33:16.299,0:33:18.779
making this case statement because of such[br]and such,

0:33:18.779,0:33:19.879
do you go to that level, or?

0:33:19.879,0:33:21.979
J.M.: Yeah. We, I will sometimes go to that

0:33:21.979,0:33:25.239
level if, if I feel like that it's needed.

0:33:25.239,0:33:28.879
Often, yeah, I'm kind of like, constantly[br]talking. And

0:33:28.879,0:33:31.089
I've recorded myself doing it, so I could[br]show,

0:33:31.089,0:33:32.690
like, for a presentation or something like[br]that. I

0:33:32.690,0:33:34.940
actually kind of hate listening to myself[br]do all

0:33:34.940,0:33:38.409
that. But I, I think it's valuable. And I

0:33:38.409,0:33:41.909
find that often, my pair will in, sort of

0:33:41.909,0:33:43.440
call me out when I'm not doing that. You

0:33:43.440,0:33:45.149
know, I'll be kind of, like, in a zone

0:33:45.149,0:33:46.539
and kind of going and like the thoughts are

0:33:46.539,0:33:48.609
coming out and they'll say, like, well, what,[br]what,

0:33:48.609,0:33:50.289
what do you, what are you, what are you

0:33:50.289,0:33:53.339
doing? And I'll realize, ooh, I haven't, I'll[br]realize

0:33:53.339,0:33:55.549
I haven't been, I haven't been saying anything.[br]I

0:33:55.549,0:33:59.580
haven't been vocalizing it. And so, you know,[br]that,

0:33:59.580,0:34:01.639
I think, is also kind of a tick mark

0:34:01.639,0:34:06.249
in the be more vocal column.

0:34:06.249,0:34:09.409
Were those the two questions?

0:34:09.409,0:34:09.629
AUDIENCE MEMBER: Junior developers.

0:34:09.629,0:34:09.889
J.M.: Junior developers. My god.

0:34:09.889,0:34:10.109
AUDIENCE MEMBER: Letting them-

0:34:10.109,0:34:10.810
J.M.: What's happening to me?

0:34:10.810,0:34:13.969
AUDIENCE MEMBER: -work through the problem[br]when you know

0:34:13.969,0:34:14.320
it.

0:34:14.320,0:34:17.849
J.M.: Yes. So, techniques for trying to let[br]the

0:34:17.849,0:34:22.139
junior people drive more when you're more[br]senior. It's

0:34:22.139,0:34:25.649
certainly hard. Some people never get it.[br]Some people,

0:34:25.649,0:34:26.960
it can be especially bad if you have a

0:34:26.960,0:34:29.489
person who is, let's say, naturally, or professionally[br]more

0:34:29.489,0:34:32.340
passive, and somebody who is naturally or[br]professionally more

0:34:32.340,0:34:39.060
assertive. Tricks for that are just both sides[br]trying

0:34:39.060,0:34:40.989
to be more honest and vocal about things.

0:34:40.989,0:34:42.989
Like, oh, in saying, like, hey, do you mind

0:34:42.989,0:34:45.199
if I drive now? Would you like to drive?

0:34:45.199,0:34:49.030
I have physically sat on my hands. Like, underneath

0:34:49.030,0:34:52.820
my thighs. And when I feel myself, like, pull

0:34:52.820,0:34:54.260
my hand out, I'm like, ah, get it back

0:34:54.260,0:34:59.780
in there. Sit down. And ping pong pairing,[br]if

0:34:59.780,0:35:01.890
people haven't heard of that, is a great sort

0:35:01.890,0:35:07.120
of structure to, to implement, to kind of[br]enforce

0:35:07.120,0:35:09.690
a rigidity in the bounce back and forth. So,

0:35:09.690,0:35:12.500
again, this is testing, test-driven development.[br]So if you're

0:35:12.500,0:35:14.320
doing test-driven development, you can have[br]one person write

0:35:14.320,0:35:17.430
a failing test, and the other person implement[br]the

0:35:17.430,0:35:20.600
code to make it pass. And then they, the

0:35:20.600,0:35:22.840
second person, writes a failing test, and[br]the other

0:35:22.840,0:35:24.730
person writes the code to make it pass. And

0:35:24.730,0:35:27.400
you can sort of enforce that rigidity while[br]you

0:35:27.400,0:35:28.280
need it.

0:35:28.280,0:35:31.330
And it was, it can actually be a not-so-subtle

0:35:31.330,0:35:34.230
cue, that somebody is being a keyboard hog.[br]And

0:35:34.230,0:35:36.670
I encourage people to do this if they maybe

0:35:36.670,0:35:39.950
don't want to be confrontational about, like,[br]gimme the

0:35:39.950,0:35:42.140
damn keyboard. But if somebody's kind of going,[br]or

0:35:42.140,0:35:44.390
let's say, if you're going along, and your[br]coding

0:35:44.390,0:35:46.040
and everything is great, and then your pair[br]says,

0:35:46.040,0:35:48.800
hey, how about if we do some ping pong?

0:35:48.800,0:35:54.280
Like, oh. Hmm. Maybe I'm driving too much.[br]Or

0:35:54.280,0:35:56.100
you can, you can say, like, oh, let's ping

0:35:56.100,0:35:58.120
pong this one. What do you say? Like, that

0:35:58.120,0:36:00.650
can be a, maybe a less assertive way of

0:36:00.650,0:36:02.880
saying let's balance it out.

0:36:02.880,0:36:04.700
Trace, you have something to say?

0:36:04.700,0:36:07.430
AUDIENCE MEMBER: Oh, just, I'm really glad[br]you mentioned.

0:36:07.430,0:36:09.770
Thanks. I'm really glad you mentioned ping[br]pong as

0:36:09.770,0:36:12.650
a, a technique to help manage that. When I

0:36:12.650,0:36:13.900
first started pairing, it was definitely something[br]that was

0:36:13.900,0:36:16.040
very hard for me to do, and I had

0:36:16.040,0:36:17.000
to do the same thing. I sat on my

0:36:17.000,0:36:19.910
hands for three weeks. I, I saw people like,

0:36:19.910,0:36:21.730
you know, when I sat side by side with

0:36:21.730,0:36:22.990
someone, I'll see their hands come near the[br]keyboard,

0:36:22.990,0:36:24.470
and my will always leave. Or if their hands

0:36:24.470,0:36:26.610
leave the keyboard, I'm, OK. It's my time[br]to

0:36:26.610,0:36:29.050
speak. And I'll raise them up.

0:36:29.050,0:36:31.620
So I've heard of some of the other paradigms,

0:36:31.620,0:36:34.470
like driver-navigator, for example. What are[br]some of the

0:36:34.470,0:36:37.810
other pairing patterns in addition to ping[br]pong and

0:36:37.810,0:36:40.020
when might they be good to use, and what

0:36:40.020,0:36:40.680
are their names?

0:36:40.680,0:36:44.400
J.M.: Oh, let's see. Yeah, driver-navigator[br]is sort of

0:36:44.400,0:36:48.190
the, the canonical pairing structure people[br]think about, where

0:36:48.190,0:36:50.400
one person is literally driving and one person[br]is

0:36:50.400,0:36:54.140
literally saying, oh, OK, well you missed[br]this and,

0:36:54.140,0:36:56.510
hey, maybe, you know, let's use an if and

0:36:56.510,0:36:58.580
not an unless there, and that kind of a

0:36:58.580,0:36:59.800
thing. And they're kind of also kind of looking

0:36:59.800,0:37:01.060
over the rest of the code and say, like,

0:37:01.060,0:37:03.290
hey, how about we extract, you know, finish[br]that

0:37:03.290,0:37:05.240
up, but let's extract that as a method next.

0:37:05.240,0:37:06.330
And kind of a thing.

0:37:06.330,0:37:07.960
As far as, those, that's the one I'm most

0:37:07.960,0:37:11.400
familiar with. The, and, and that can be great.

0:37:11.400,0:37:13.220
I think that's kind of the natural mode of

0:37:13.220,0:37:15.730
most pairings. Is like, one person is like[br]actively

0:37:15.730,0:37:19.100
engaged and, and driving, the other one, or,[br]actively

0:37:19.100,0:37:21.310
engaged in typing, the other person is, is[br]doing

0:37:21.310,0:37:23.600
more navigating. I think that the challenge[br]can be

0:37:23.600,0:37:27.700
figuring out when, when to switch. Testing[br]really helps

0:37:27.700,0:37:29.760
for that. And if you don't do testing, let's

0:37:29.760,0:37:32.630
say you don't, then maybe you can use some

0:37:32.630,0:37:35.050
other kind of bounds. Like, you know, you[br]just

0:37:35.050,0:37:36.910
wrote this method. OK, now the next guy writes

0:37:36.910,0:37:40.020
the next method. Or, you know, you're doing[br]a

0:37:40.020,0:37:43.820
bunch of refactoring and extracting classes[br]and, and methods

0:37:43.820,0:37:45.450
or something like that, then, you know, you[br]bounce

0:37:45.450,0:37:49.190
back and forth between the thing you're extracting,[br]for

0:37:49.190,0:37:49.930
example.

0:37:49.930,0:37:54.100
OK. We gotta couple minutes. One minute actually.

0:37:54.100,0:37:57.440
AUDIENCE MEMBER: The most useful thing that[br]I ever

0:37:57.440,0:38:00.360
did for stopping myself from over driving[br]was getting

0:38:00.360,0:38:02.730
a chess clock. So that we could actually see

0:38:02.730,0:38:05.350
how much time I spent driving. And so when

0:38:05.350,0:38:07.550
I'm looking at the clock and I'm forty-five[br]minutes

0:38:07.550,0:38:10.250
ahead, it, it's very helpful.

0:38:10.250,0:38:12.250
J.M.: That is excellent.

0:38:12.250,0:38:14.860
AUDIENCE MEMBER: And another technique is[br]to just turn

0:38:14.860,0:38:17.010
your keyboard over if you have two keyboards.[br]Just

0:38:17.010,0:38:19.060
make it so you can't type.

0:38:19.060,0:38:20.860
J.M.: That's a really good one, too.

0:38:20.860,0:38:22.100
OK. Forty seconds, go.

0:38:22.100,0:38:25.020
AUDIENCE MEMBER: Based on your experience,[br]can you share

0:38:25.020,0:38:27.340
what you consider to be good habits and effective

0:38:27.340,0:38:30.310
habits in pair programming? And then can you,[br]are

0:38:30.310,0:38:33.000
there, are there pitfalls that people tend[br]to fall

0:38:33.000,0:38:36.580
into that, are there commonalities that you[br]see in,

0:38:36.580,0:38:37.110
in?

0:38:37.110,0:38:39.910
J.M.: Sure. In twenty-five seconds I will,[br]I'll put

0:38:39.910,0:38:42.170
it this way. I think it's, the main thing

0:38:42.170,0:38:44.570
is to remember that we're all human, and that

0:38:44.570,0:38:47.520
it's not really about technology or, really,[br]about programming,

0:38:47.520,0:38:50.590
per se. It's about being patient and having[br]a

0:38:50.590,0:38:54.040
good attitude and building trust. So as long[br]as

0:38:54.040,0:38:56.390
we all have a good attitude with each other,

0:38:56.390,0:38:59.150
trust each other, are patient with each other[br]as

0:38:59.150,0:39:01.970
we're all learning, I think that's really[br]the key

0:39:01.970,0:39:03.980
to pair programming. You can apply that to[br]almost

0:39:03.980,0:39:07.920
any situation, but especially this very strange[br]and extreme

0:39:07.920,0:39:11.160
version of software development. I hope that[br]helps.

0:39:11.160,0:39:15.600
That's it. We're out of time. Like I said,

0:39:15.600,0:39:16.680
thank you.