The company I work for are on the verge of introducing the agile project methodology to our coding process.
Having read Steve Yegge's Good Agile, Bad Agile - http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2006/09/good-agile-bad-agile_27.html - I am somewhat skeptical about it being anything more than an unnecessary fad.
What are HNer's experiences with agile and would you recommend/advise against it?
UPDATE: Changed title to something less black and white :-)
It does a good job at critiquing the XP movement (and agile), including some of the examples from Kent Beck's Extreme Programming Explained, e.g. showing how the XP/agile poster-project, the Chrysler C3 payroll system, failed.
It's focused on XP, but many of the points work for other agile methodologies.
Else run for the hills!
It's not a religion, try it see if you like it (or parts of it), discard it if you don't perceive any benefit.
If a methodology says that you must write everything down on cards and pair program, etc. etc. as the fundamental basis of the approach, and that is really ultimately counter-productive to the efficient running of a project, then you could quite fairly describe the approach as 'bad', or at least faulted.
It's a question of whether it helps or gets in the way.
Also, you can really only take good parts of it if the people executing it don't start themselves seeing it as somewhat religious - if they feel we should 'do agile' and that means following it as written down, then they're unlikely to be open to cropping bad pieces off.
But I do wish to contend that a methodology is not just a tool and inevitably has some sort of a dogma attached to it, well it seems that way to me anyway :-)
For the most part, agile shines if you had no organization in place at all, then it is easy (low entry barrier) to get going and to see an immediate improvement.
But when comparing agile to any other SDM it's just another tool in the box and not spectacularly better or worse than any other.