NICAR 2010 talk: Good habits

This is a script for a talk I’ll be delivering shortly, with Jacob Fenton’s assistance, at NICAR 2010 in Phoenix. Readers may find it similar to, though more complete than, my ONA talk, a few posts back. Consider this version better.

For more frequent updates on what I’m up to, visit the News Apps Blog.

UPDATE: The smiley face next to my little Rails joke wasn’t strong enough, added a bit, plus a link.

We’re here to talk about some boring stuff. Get-more-fiber-in-your-diet kind of stuff. It’s titled “Development Techniques” on the schedule, but this talk might be better to call it “Best Practices in Software Engineering”, or “Good Habits When Making Software”, or “Ass-saving Shit That Some Other Smart People Figured Out, Because Your Problems Aren’t New.”

My favorite metaphor for explaining programming to non-coders is that it’s like carpentry. You can put together a chest of drawers with nails and glue, and it’ll fall apart in a year, or you can build something lasting and use dovetail joints. We’re not plumbers providing a utility, but neither are we artists. It’s nice if our work is beautiful, but it also must be durable. We’re craftsmen. We make things that people use.

The point of all this is that craftsmanship matters. So, I’m here to ask you to change your ways, to consider adopting some processes, not because they’re fun, but because they’ll save your ass, and help you do better work. And once you’re in the habit, of writing tests and deployment scripts, of tracking your defects and versioning your code, you’ll wonder how you ever went without.

So, we’re trying something new today. I’m gonna run through these concepts fairly quickly, and in-between, Jacob will reflect on his work adopting many of these practices. It shouldn’t take very long, and at the end we’ll take questions.

Version Control

Version control software is both a safety net and a collaboration tool. It’s a place, usually away from your machine, where you store your code. And when you write new code, it hangs on to your previous versions. Even on a one-person project, version control is essential. When your hard drive crashes, you don’t lose your work. And, when you’re working with others on a common codebase, it acts as a central repository to help coordinate everyone’s changes.

We use Git. Other folks like Mercurial. Subversion would also be a fine choice, though it’s no longer the cool kids’ favorite.

Task Tracking

It may sound bossy, but task tracking is not about micromanagement, or at least it doesn’t have to be. In my experience, on any project, you’ll only really know how deep in the weeds you are if you can see all the tasks, listed out. Also, I find that forgetting to do something is extremely embarrassing. So, you can track tasks in a text file or in a spreadsheet on your desktop, but I’ve found thats teams work better if the TODO list is out in the open. So, go low-tech and use 3×5 cards pinned to the wall — or go high-tech and use one of many software packages designed for the purpose.

We use Unfuddle. Trac is also a fine choice. If you’re using GitHub for hosted Git version control, it comes with issue tracking, but I haven’t heard many people express their love for it. That said, it might be worth a shot.

Defect Tracking

When you find a defect, log it. Take a screenshot, and type up sufficient details to reproduce the problem. This may seem heavy-handed, but defects are your unplanned tasks, they must always be addressed — either by fixing them, or explicitly choosing to let them slide. Known defects are totally okay. But unknown defects, on the other hand, are the devil. So, always, always, please record your defects, even if you’re going to fix them immediately. One of these days, you *will* get distracted half-way through a fix. And you *will* forget. Unlike tasks, I’d say always take the high-tech route with defects. They’re best tracked with software.

We use the same system to track our tasks and defects, Unfuddle. Usually you do it that way. Another catchall option that might work for you is FogBugz.

Staging Environment

Similar to defect tracking, your staging environment is there to reduce uncertainty. It’s an environment — servers, your databases and applications, everything — that you run in parallel to production. It should be identical to your production system. (If you’re using Amazon EC2, this is pretty much as simple as copying your production instance!) Your goal is this: knowing that, if your application works in staging, it will work in production. You can execute load tests and performance tests against your staging environment, as well as test your deployment scripts, and, as a bonus, it can host your work for demos, etc.

We use Amazon EC2 for our hosting, and keep carbon-copy instances running in staging and production at all times. We’ve written about how to set up your own EC2 environment on our team blog.

Load Testing

The Tribune news apps team learned an important lesson in February, when Illinois voters went to vote in the primaries, and our Election Center app was put to the test. We had thought our production setup was great. The harder we abused it, the more load we threw in our tests, it just kept performing. “Great!”, we thought, “This system is gonna work awesome.” Well, you can probably guess where I’m going with this.

We crashed and burned on election day. The Election Center was useless. (For the server nerds in the audience — our top was pegged well over 100.) Luckily, a few Google searches gave us a way to route around the bottleneck (using the awesome pgpool), and we were back up and running after only a half hour or so. The lesson we learned was this: A good test must fail. You need to know your breaking point. Make the servers effing cry. Because they *will* cry. And if you don’t know your limits, you’re asking for trouble. We got very lucky. There was a readily-googleable, turnkey fix for our problem. We might not be so lucky next time.

We use ab to make our servers cry.

Push-button Deployment

When everything is running smoothly, a multi-step deployment process (gather the code, FTP it all to the server, restart apache, etc.) doesn’t seem like so much of a hassle. But when the shit hits the fan, your editor is breathing down your neck, and you’ve gotta fix that bug, fast — let’s say, on an important election day — you’ll screw up. You’ll forget something, and your minor bug will become a nightmare. Everything will break, and you’ll be even more freaked out.

Push-button deployment won’t fix your bugs, but it will help you keep your cool. It will also saves you from the tedium of redeployment, and act as a guide when you need to redeploy your project months or years down the line. If you’re running an identical staging environment, you’re even better off, because you can develop your deployment script for staging, use it a few dozen times, and then when it’s time to roll to production, you know it’ll work.

You can write deployment scripts on your own but there are lots of great tools out there, built to make deployment dead-easy. We use Fabric, and have written about our scripts in great detail. If you’re into Ruby, I’m pretty sure that Capistrano is the current state of the art.

Web Frameworks and Agility

Making websites used to be slow work. Web frameworks make you fast. If you’re fast, you can, obviously, turn around projects in a more timely fashion. But, the maybe less obvious advantage of high-speed development tools is that they enable you to fail fast. And what I mean by that is, it used to be that you’d have to write code for a month before you had anything you could show off. Using frameworks, you can create something interesting very quickly, in days or hours, and the faster you create, the faster you can be critiqued. We never go more than a day or two between show-and-tell sessions with reporters, and when we’re working on a long-running project, we hold reviews with our stakeholders every Friday afternoon. Frameworks enable us to learn from our mistakes and correct course very quickly. They enable us to be agile.

We use Django, a web framework with deep roots in the news industry. There are people here who will tell you to instead use Ruby on Rails. They are not to be trusted. I kiiid. Check out Aron Pilhofer’s post, How Not to Choose a Web Framework.

Testing

Automated tests kick ass. It’s not immediately obvious, but ‘testing’ is about more than merely ensuring correctness. Tests can help you write code faster, and they can save you six months down the road when you’ve half-forgotten about your project. But before they can save you, you’ve gotta write ‘em. The tests I most commonly write are called ‘unit tests’. A unit test is a bit of code that checks if another bit of code you’ve written works properly. For example, let’s say you’re writing a web application that calculates people’s income tax obligations. There are a lot of special cases that vary on how much money you make, if you’re paying a mortgage, etc. To test your calculations, you could visit the web page you wrote, over and over again, typing in each special case you can think of. If you’re especially thorough, you might even keep a spreadsheet to check off correct numbers. This would be thorough, but insane. Instead, you should write unit tests — code that exercises each special case automatically, by testing your calculations directly. First, you won’t waste countless hours reloading a web page, and second when, six months later, they update the laws and you’ve gotta fix your code, you can test all the permutations again at a keystroke.

Most web frameworks include a rig for easily testing your work.

Further Reading

I’ll keep the book list short. Pick these two up. Know them. Love them.

ONA09 un-conference session proposal: The craft of making software — Anyone interested?

UPDATE — The folks at ONA have announced that they’ll provide rooms for un-conference talks! Woot! But if there’s more need than space, it’ll be up to a vote, so *please* get there early and vote me up! Hope to see you there!

The schedule for ONA09 is jam-packed with shiny stuff — social networks, mobile tech, they’ve even got Leo and Ev! Great. But the reality is that Twitter will not save the news, just like chrome rims can’t save General Motors.

We can talk about technologies, tools and innovators all weekend long, but it won’t help if news organizations don’t understand the basic principles of software development. So, if anyone out there is interested, I’d like to arrange an un-conference to talk about some un-shiny, boring-ass shit: software development methodologies.

Topics of import we might address:

  • Version control
  • Task and defect tracking
  • Goals, use cases and designing with your audience in mind
  • Working iteratively and being agile

Code is not something you can slap up like wallpaper. Making software is a craft. It requires discipline and skills far beyond a superficial awareness of the technologies available. At every moment of the process, from conception to release, there are right and wrong ways to make software.

Imagine a news organization with only writers, and no editors. They might manage to crank out some successful stories, but without editorial controls, the failure rate would be astronomical. From what I’ve learned in my (admittedly brief) time in this industry, this is the state of software development at newspapers — it’s failure-ridden, amateurish and ad-hoc.

Let’s do it the right way

Over the years, lots of clever people have studied the craft of software development, and come up with battle-tested tools, best-practices and processes to reduce the failure rate and better-ensure success. I learned a thing or two about these methods in my previous life, and would love to share.

So, I’d like to set up an un-conference session. We’ll get a room and a projector and talk process. Who’s interested in attending? What topics would you like to see addressed? Would anybody else like to present?

(If there’s no response, I’ll shut up and go back to work — but if I’ve convinced you, please leave a comment. No comments, no un-conference.)

How we built News Mixer, part 3: our agile process

This post is last in a three-part series on News Mixer — the final project of my masters program for hacker-journalists at the Medill School of Journalism. It’s adapted (more or less verbatim) from my part of our final presentation. Visit our team blog at crunchberry.org to read the story of the project from its conception to birth, and to (soon) read our report and watch a video of our final presentation.

When you made software back in the day, first you spent the better part of year or so filling a fatty 3-ring binder with detailed specifications. Then you threw that binder over the cubicle wall to the awkward guys on the programming team.

They’d spend a year building software to the specification, and after two years, you’d have a product that no one wanted, because while you were working, the world changed. Maybe Microsoft beat you to market, or maybe Google took over. Either way, you can’t dodge the iceberg.

IMG_3605 by nautical2k
IMG_3605 by nautical2k

Agile software development is different. With agile, we plan less up front, and correct our course along the way. We design a little, we build a little, we test a little, and then we look up to see if we’re still on course. In practice, we worked in one-week cycles, called “iterations,” and kept a strict schedule.

How we met
Every morning, we scrum. A scrum is a five-minute meeting where everyone stands up, and tells the team what they did yesterday and what they’re going to do today.

And at the end of the work week, we all met for an hour to review the work done during the iteration, and to present it to our stakeholders, in this case, Annette Schulte at the Gazette and our instructors Rich Gordon and Jeremy Gilbert.

Design, develop, test, repeat!
In the following iteration, our consumer insights team tested what we built, our panel in Cedar Rapids. And their input contributed to upcoming designs and development.

And we managed this process with free and open-source tools. With a couple hundred bucks (hosting costs) and some elbow grease, we had version control for our code, a blog to promote ourselves (using WordPress), a task tracking system with a wiki for knowledge management, and a suite of collaboration tools – all of which are open source, or in the case of the Google tool suite, based heavily on open source software, and all free like speech and free like beer.

That’s all for now! Hungry for more on agile? Check out my posts about our agile process on the Crunchberry blog, and read Agile Software Development, Principles, Patterns, and Practices by Robert C. Martin, and The Pragmatic Programmer, by Andy Hunt and Dave Thomas, and Getting Real by the folks at 37signals.

Building a news product with agile practices: How we’re doing it

The Crunchberry Project is using agile software development practices as we build a new product for the Cedar Rapids Gazette.  On the team blog, I’ve begun writing a series of pieces detailing our process.

Part one was a brief attempt at defining agile and explaining why it’s important:

What can happen in a year?  Twitter catches on.  The stock market crashes.  Your competitor releases a new product.  A new congress is elected, and they change the laws.  It’s discovered that margarine is healthier than butter.  Your business model becomes obsolete.  And you’ve invested nine months in a product that nobody needs anymore.

And let’s just say that you’re living in a time warp, and the world remains completely static, who’s to say that you even got the requirements right in the first place?  If you’re wrong, you just invested a year of work in a system that doesn’t work for your users.

As a great Chicagoan once said: “Life moves pretty fast. If you don’t stop and look around once and a while, you could miss it.”  Your requirements will change.  Agile teams are prepared for the chaos.

Part two in the series begins to explain how our team is implementing agile processes: how we meet, the weekly atomic work cycle known as an iteration, and why we think meetings are toxic.  Plus, it’s got a great parenthetical reading list:

(… If you want to do this right, read Agile Software Development, Principles, Patterns, and Practices by Robert C. Martin, and The Pragmatic Programmer, by Andy Hunt, and Dave Thomas.  Or even better, go to Ann Arbor and learn it from the badasses at The Menlo Institute.)

(Also, read Getting Real by the folks at 37signals.  Please, just trust me on this one.  It’s important.  Much more important than reading this silly blog post, that’s for sure.)

In the upcoming weeks, I’ll be sharing our design process, task and defect tracking, how we test, and lots more.  Stay tuned!

Can old media get agile?

Signal vs. Noise sez:

We stalled launching our Job Board for a while because we felt we had bigger fish to fry. Once we got around to it, we couldn’t believe we had waited so long. It was easy to set up, a great resource for our community, and has generated lots of cash for the company.

There’s more than one way to skin the revenue cat.

They go on to suggest that this is a virtue of being a small, agile company.

This is something new and webby. In the before times, diversification took gobs of capital, either for R&D or aquisitions. Now you can just code up a job board, and bang! Your software company is a recruiting company.

Form, by carlosluis
Form, by carlosluis

Are old media too big to use the web like this? Maybe not.

The New York Times is getting into the game (quoting Matter/Anti-Matter):

In essence, this means the Times is turning into a software company, applying the same business model philosophy “as many start-ups in Silicon Valley:” “Build neat tools, get traction, and then figure out how to make money off them later,” as the Silicon Alley Insider describes it.

Whaddya think?

The SVN post also gives props to Apple – not a small company, but one with killer leadership. Do media execs even *want* to be agile? Or have they got too much mass?