知识库

Eye(FR) → Mill(skill) → Library(/app)

← 返回列表
Hacker News · 2026-05-13 · 已成文 · 来源 file

项目管理工具若内建 story points 与伪敏捷仪式会鼓励错误度量;Mainline 将故事尺寸硬编码为 1、用 start→release 时间分布替代规划扑克——agent 团队同样应用可观测吞吐替代虚荣指标。

为什么重要

人机协作交付若用故事点与巨大 backlog,会复制 dark agile;更应跟踪 cycle time 分布与异常任务。

正文

Show HN: Mainline – a project tool with no backlog, story points or surveillance

Claim

项目管理工具若内建 story points 与伪敏捷仪式会鼓励错误度量;Mainline 将故事尺寸硬编码为 1、用 start→release 时间分布替代规划扑克——agent 团队同样应用可观测吞吐替代虚荣指标。

Why it matters

人机协作交付若用故事点与巨大 backlog,会复制 dark agile;更应跟踪 cycle time 分布与异常任务。

Summary

作者针对 Agile/CI 剧场构建 Mainline:取消故事点(Ron Jeffries 亦后悔滥用),固定 size=1,用交付时间分布识别异常。

Actions

  • 停用故事点绩效
  • 记录 agent 任务 cycle time 分布

Evidence

Caveats

  • 基于介绍文快照;未深度使用产品

Research queries

  • (none)

Body

背景

组织宣称 Agile 却年发版,工具强化错误习惯。

机制

故事大小恒为 1;跟踪 start 到 release 分布;数据代替 planning poker。

取舍

失去估点安慰,换真实节奏感。

动作

停用故事点绩效;为 agent 任务记录 cycle time。

结合的源文章

主源
Show HN: Mainline – a project tool with no backlog, story points or surveillance
打开原文 ↗

原文快照

展开 / 收起快照

I've spent the last fifteen years walking into engineering orgs that said they did "CI/CD" (there's no such thing, CI and CD are distinct practices) and "Agile", and proceeded to ship annually through release ceremony and theatre. There are more than a few dark-agile patterns I'm sick of seeing, so I built a project management tool that avoids them, and that exists to be a counterweight against the tools that encourage them.

The notion of story points was the first thing to go. Even Ron Jeffries, who invented them, regrets their usage. Mainline hard-codes a story size of 1 and tracks whether each story falls outside the team's normal distribution of time from start to release. After a few weeks the team has a real handle on their cadence, backed by data instead of planning-poker theatre. No estimation meetings required. Just do the work.

Unreleased work is made visible and tracked as inventory. There's a cottage industry of hosted feature-flag platforms selling a different idea to the original technique. Long-lived business-facing flags create waste in the form of unmanaged inventory left hanging around past its usefulness. Worst case, they become a giant configuration surface that "tech debt" doesn't do enough to capture as a term. Mainline tracks branch-by-abstraction, dark launches, feature flags, and old stories in flight through three phases: in progress, ageing, and stale.

The backlog is replaced with a Story Map. Work is shown as a user journey, and if it's not on the map (or has no user persona associated) it doesn't exist. This makes it harder for someone to dump tech tasks or random work onto the team for the purpose of "having a backlog."

The collaboration patterns high-performing teams use are first-class. Ensemble, pairing, and solo work are all visible and tracked, which makes de-siloing legible and promotes co-ownership.

I resisted adding AI features. It would be a weekend's work, and it would also undo the whole point. The longer argument is at mainline.dev/docs/ai.

I started building this with event sourcing and CQRS because I wanted the app built around an immutable event log. It wound up being too much boilerplate to change anything simple. So I went with an RDBMS and transactions to implement the immutable event log instead.

As I've learned after watching dozens of microservice teams utterly fail to safely ship anything, I took my own advice and started with a boring monolith and RDBMS. The stack itself is boring on purpose: Ruby with Roda and Sequel, Puma with YJIT, deployed via Kamal to Hetzner.

For teams who want to get better at CI, I built an integration with GitHub (GitLab coming) that reads the repo statuses and tracks how long a branch (if any are used) is open for. It's just a red/green dot on the repos as a heads-up.

The live demo is at mainline.dev/demo. No signup required, read-only because it's one shared team.

I'd be interested in feedback on how else I can help teams get better at CI and CD, and on any gripes you have with the parasitic management layer of non-practitioners who use other tools to implement Taylorist methods. Also, any other features that I haven't thought of (or thought of removing).


Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48122837

Points: 3

# Comments: 0