Controversial aspects

The practices in XP accept been heavily debated.5 Proponents of acute programming affirmation that by accepting the on-site customer5 appeal changes informally, the action becomes flexible, and saves the amount of academic overhead. Critics of XP affirmation this can beforehand to cher rework and action ambit edge above what was ahead agreed or funded.

Change ascendancy boards are a assurance that there are abeyant conflicts in action objectives and constraints amid assorted users. XP's expedited alignment is somewhat abased on programmers getting able to accept a unified applicant angle so the programmer can apply on coding rather than affidavit of accommodation objectives and constraints. This aswell applies if assorted programming organizations are involved, decidedly organizations which attempt for shares of projects.citation needed

Other potentially arguable aspects of acute programming include:

Requirements are bidding as automatic accepting tests rather than blueprint documents.

Requirements are authentic incrementally, rather than aggravating to get them all in advance.

Software developers are usually appropriate to plan in pairs.

There is no Big Architectonics Up Front. Most of the architectonics action takes abode on the fly and incrementally, starting with "the simplest affair that could possibly work" and abacus complication alone if it's appropriate by declining tests. Critics analyze this to "debugging a arrangement into appearance" and abhorrence this will aftereffect in added re-design accomplishment than alone re-designing if requirements change.

A chump adumbrative is absorbed to the project. This role can become a single-point-of-failure for the project, and some humans accept begin it to be a antecedent of stress. Also, there is the crisis of micro-management by a non-technical adumbrative aggravating to behest the use of abstruse software appearance and architecture.

Dependence aloft all added aspects of XP: "XP is like a ring of poisonous snakes, daisy-chained together. All it takes is for one of them to convulse loose, and you've got a actual angry, poisonous snake branch your way."13

editScalability

Historically, XP alone works on teams of twelve or beneath people. One way to avoid this limitation is to breach up the action into abate pieces and the aggregation into abate groups. It has been claimed that XP has been acclimated auspiciously on teams of over a hundred developerscitation needed. ThoughtWorks has claimed reasonable success on broadcast XP projects with up to sixty peoplecitation needed.

In 2004 Industrial Acute Programming (IXP)14 was alien as an change of XP. It is advised to accompany the adeptness to plan in ample and broadcast teams. It now has 23 practices and adjustable values. As it is a new affiliate of the Agile family, there is not abundant abstracts to prove its usability, about it claims to be an acknowledgment to what it sees as XP's imperfections.

editSeverability and responses

In 2003, Matt Stephens and Doug Rosenberg appear Acute Programming Refactored: The Case Against XP which questioned the amount of the XP action and appropriate means in which it could be improved. This triggered a diffuse agitation in articles, internet newsgroups, and web-site babble areas. The amount altercation of the book is that XP's practices are commutual but that few applied organizations are willing/able to accept all the practices; accordingly the absolute action fails. The book aswell makes added criticisms and it draws a affinity of XP's "collective ownership" archetypal to socialism in a abrogating manner.

Certain aspects of XP accept afflicted back the book Acute Programming Refactored (2003) was published; in particular, XP now accommodates modifications to the practices as continued as the appropriate objectives are still met. XP aswell uses more all-encompassing agreement for processes. Some altercate that these changes invalidate antecedent criticisms; others affirmation that this is artlessly watering the action down.

RDP Convenance is a address for dressmaking acute programming. This convenance was initially proposed as a continued analysis cardboard in a branch organized by Philippe Kruchten and Steve Adolph( See APSO branch at ICSE 2008) and yet it is the alone proposed and applicative adjustment for customizing XP. The admired concepts abaft RDP practice, in a abbreviate time provided the account for account of it in industries. RDP Convenance tries to adapt XP by relying on address XP Rules.

Other authors accept approved to accommodate XP with the earlier methods in adjustment to anatomy a unified methodology. Some of these XP approved to replace, such as the avalanche method; example: Action Lifecycles: Waterfall, Rapid Application Development, and All That. JPMorgan Chase & Co. approved accumulation XP with the computer programming methodologies of Capability Maturity Archetypal Integration (CMMI), and Six Sigma. They begin that the three systems able anniversary added well, arch to bigger development, and did not mutually contradict.15