In any movement there tends to be an overreaction or over-correction. Some Agilists interpreted the principle as “no process and tools,” which was not the intent. Card walls, spreadsheets, and wikis became the tools of choice for many 敏捷 teams. However, these same teams that eschewed Microsoft Project and complicated modeling tools did embrace tools that enhanced programming and testing—development environments and testing tools like j-Unit and FIT.
在过程方面，在我的书中 敏捷 Project Management 我概述了一个五步开发过程-构想，推测，探索，适应和关闭。有一次，我在一家非常大的公司工作，我被问到我的流程在哪里。经理们正在寻找分层分解的详细流程，而不是具有一系列异步实践的高级流程。因此，问题不是“否”流程，而是构建一个简化的流程。
This is all a lead-in to the fact that it’s not a case of having an ALM or not—many organizations clearly need one—but of the type of ALM and which parts of the development process it concentrates on. With the growing interest in Continuous Integration and Continuous 交货, what we need is a re-definition of ALM; a definition that fits with the advances in 敏捷 and Lean practices over the last few years.
Three colleagues of mine at ThoughtWorks have made a great beginning at such a definition, not from the standpoint of this feature and that, but from the perspective of the high-level principles that should define an 敏捷 ALM. 敏捷 ALM: Redefining ALM with Five Key Practices, 通过 Ethan Teng, Cyndi Mitchell, Chad Wathington has just been released. For those of you who are working on larger projects, or those who are trying to implement Continuous Integration and Continuous Design, or those who are trying to define what 敏捷 ALM means in your organization, this paper is a good starting place.