Extreme Programming (XP)

https://ik.imagekit.io/beyondpmf/frameworks/extreme-programming-xp.png
Extreme Programming focuses on improving software quality and the development team's quality of life. This directly addresses friction related to delivery speed, technical quality, and implementation within the software development process.

Extreme Programming (XP) is a software development methodology that is intended to improve software quality and responsiveness to changing customer requirements. As a type of agile development, XP advocates frequent releases in short development cycles, which improves productivity and introduces checkpoints where new customer requirements can be adopted. The methodology also promotes teamwork, collaboration, and process adaptability throughout the life-cycle of the project.

Steps / Detailed Description

Planning: Define user stories and create a release schedule. | Designing: Simplicity is key in design to accommodate changes. | Coding: Code must be written to agreed standards and the pair programming model is often used. | Testing: Developers write unit and acceptance tests to ensure functionality and meet requirements. | Listening: Developers must constantly listen to changing requirements and customer needs. | Refactoring: Continuous improvement of code through refactoring with no changes in functionality.

Best Practices

Implement pair programming to improve code quality and knowledge sharing | Maintain a sustainable pace to prevent team burnout | Use continuous integration to detect and fix problems early

Pros

Enhances software quality and flexibility to changes | Promotes teamwork and collaborative work environment | Reduces risks through frequent testing and iterations

Cons

Requires commitment to rigorous development practices | Not suitable for remote teams as it emphasizes co-location | Can lead to burnout due to constant iterations and tight schedules

When to Use

When rapid feedback and frequent delivery are critical | In projects where requirements are expected to change frequently

When Not to Use

In large teams where coordination becomes challenging | In projects where detailed documentation is required

Related Frameworks

Categories

Lifecycle

Scope

Scope not defined

Maturity Level

Maturity level not specified

Time to Implement

2–4 Weeks
3–6 Months
1–2 Weeks
3–6 Months
1–2 Months
3–6 Months
1–2 Weeks
Less Than 1 Day
1–2 Weeks
Longer Than 6 Months
1–2 Weeks
Longer Than 6 Months
1–2 Weeks
3–6 Months
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Days
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
3–6 Months
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
3–6 Months
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
2–4 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Days
1–2 Weeks
Longer Than 6 Months
Longer Than 6 Months
3–6 Months
Longer Than 6 Months
Longer Than 6 Months
Longer Than 6 Months
1–2 Weeks
Longer Than 6 Months
3–6 Months
Less Than 1 Day
3–6 Months
1–2 Months
3–6 Months
Longer Than 6 Months
3–6 Months
Less Than 1 Day
1–2 Weeks
3–6 Months
3–6 Months
1–2 Weeks
3–6 Months
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Days
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Months
Longer Than 6 Months
1–2 Weeks
Longer Than 6 Months
1–2 Weeks
3–6 Months
1–2 Weeks
Less Than 1 Day
1–2 Weeks
3–6 Months
1–2 Weeks
3–6 Months
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
Longer Than 6 Months
Less Than 1 Day
3–6 Months
Longer Than 6 Months
1–2 Months
1–2 Weeks
Longer Than 6 Months
1–2 Weeks
3–6 Months
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
3–6 Months
Less Than 1 Day
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
3–6 Months
3–6 Months
Less Than 1 Day
1–2 Weeks
Longer Than 6 Months
1–2 Months
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
Longer Than 6 Months

Copyright Information

Autor:
Kent Beck
1999
Publication:
Addison-Wesley