One guy commented an article Agile is Dead with(You can see the comment in the end of that article) :
What insight! I guess you can go back to waterfall.
Ken
So what does "go back to waterfall" here means?
-
1Agile vs. Waterfall.– user3395Commented May 3, 2016 at 2:26
Add a comment
|
1 Answer
The waterfall model is a step-by-step methodology for software engineering, often derided for being slow and inefficient. Agile methodology is largely a response to the shortcomings of the waterfall model, and the author of the article is either predicting or reporting the "death" of Agile. As I read it, the comment you're asking about is deeply sarcastic:
What insight! I guess you can go back to waterfall.
The commenter actually means: "This is not very insightful at all. You're claiming to tell me about the end of a process that almost everybody in the business has adopted, but you haven't even proposed a replacement." By you can go back to waterfall, the commenter is pretending to take the article at face value and proposing the fairly ridiculous prospect of returning to a system that few people would prefer.
-
1Thanks. I heard a lot about Agile these days, and I just forget the old waterfall model...– SayalicCommented May 3, 2016 at 2:34
-
Does "go back to the waterfall" more correct in grammar than "go back to waterfall"?– SayalicCommented May 3, 2016 at 5:30
-
1@Sayakiss - Very interesting question. I'd probably include the "the"; however, it's okay either way. Whether it's included or omitted influences how I read the sentence. I'd read: I guess you can go back to waterfall to mean, "I guess you can go back to waterfall [development]," while: I guess you can go back to the waterfall" would mean, "I guess you can go back to the waterfall [methodology]."– J.R. ♦Commented May 3, 2016 at 9:40
-
2@Sayakiss - No, "go back to the waterfall" doesn't really make sense here, because we're not talking about a specific waterfall. Waterfall is more like a proper name here.– stangdonCommented May 3, 2016 at 14:23