<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: MoSCoW Ratings in Agile Project Management</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.pmhut.com/moscow-ratings-in-agile-project-management/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.pmhut.com/moscow-ratings-in-agile-project-management</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 23 May 2012 16:09:58 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Patrick Merg</title>
		<link>http://www.pmhut.com/moscow-ratings-in-agile-project-management/comment-page-1#comment-1168</link>
		<dc:creator>Patrick Merg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Apr 2009 14:33:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pmhut.com/moscow-ratings-in-agile-project-management#comment-1168</guid>
		<description>Hello

The Won’t category is very useful for tracking User Stories that were proposed for the product and then shelved.

Example in large enterprise projects there may be a project sponsor team that ultimately drives the strategic direction of a project.  User Stories that don’t fit that vision are candidates for a Won’t rating.

The Won’t category is less useful for smaller projects where the product owner knows what is needed.

Pat</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hello</p>
<p>The Won’t category is very useful for tracking User Stories that were proposed for the product and then shelved.</p>
<p>Example in large enterprise projects there may be a project sponsor team that ultimately drives the strategic direction of a project.  User Stories that don’t fit that vision are candidates for a Won’t rating.</p>
<p>The Won’t category is less useful for smaller projects where the product owner knows what is needed.</p>
<p>Pat</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pradeep Bhanot</title>
		<link>http://www.pmhut.com/moscow-ratings-in-agile-project-management/comment-page-1#comment-1167</link>
		<dc:creator>Pradeep Bhanot</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Mar 2009 13:32:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pmhut.com/moscow-ratings-in-agile-project-management#comment-1167</guid>
		<description>MoSCoW is more granular than what I have seen used in software projects where the product manager has usually removed the Won’t category. This leaves the “Must” and a priority ordered list of “Optional” deliverables, which are often trimmed from the bottom upwards.

When asking stakeholders to help reduce the scope, I have asked them to assign priorities 1-4 to the optional list to help us determine where in the list to make the cut.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>MoSCoW is more granular than what I have seen used in software projects where the product manager has usually removed the Won’t category. This leaves the “Must” and a priority ordered list of “Optional” deliverables, which are often trimmed from the bottom upwards.</p>
<p>When asking stakeholders to help reduce the scope, I have asked them to assign priorities 1-4 to the optional list to help us determine where in the list to make the cut.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

