Teams often work on shared code, shared resources and in shared time. We have ways of managing this, such as source control, one of the first requirements for software development maturity (falling within Levels 2 to 3 of the CMM for Software). However, not everything is easily integrated into such a process.
Developing on the example of source control, source control presents challenges that the mature team will be able to identify and overcome through the use of best practices or their own devised and agreed processes. Shared assets such as legacy systems, premium-licensed resources or even databases often exist outside of source control leaving the team requiring confidence that one developer’s work on that shared asset won’t affect others.
Meet the fork.
With the fork, a team member can wield power of access to a contended or non-source controlled asset such as database schema changes, SharePoint server configuration, leverage of a single-user licence service or other lock-required activity. The fork acts as a physical action and visual cue in the physical world, representing the reality within the virtual or abstracted world of source code, databases and servers. As a team member reaches for the fork, their wishes are explicit (“I have the fork”) and may be “blocked” by any other team member (“Oi, hang on, I need to do something first”). Without the fork, no changes may be made – or would be expected to have been made by the rest of the team.
Use of a token in this manner is predicated on the collaborative capabilities of the team, perhaps requiring that the team are co-located, small and cohesive. Such team environments aren’t always possible or available. Teams that are not co-located, are perhaps too large (spanning more than one pod of desks) or lack a cohesiveness that is conducive to casual conversation would inhibit the use of such a token; though in this case, one must answer much larger questions about why are these people working on contended assets?
There are alternatives. Use of a shared chat channel for the team such as Slack with an agreed protocol (even descending to the “claim” protocol introduced in The Walking Dead TV Show) would overcome the overly-large, distributed and communication-inhibited team; though this would require a level of buy-in or enforcement by a commonly accepted leader.
We’ve used the fork to great effect. Merging of sensitive assets such as Entity Framework .edmx files (this project has not yet made it to Code-first) can result in a whole world of pain if two developers tackle two work items that are either contradictory or contended. It’s simple and promotes added cohesiveness within the team. Our token was chosen based on what was sitting in one of our drawers and this remains a shared experience within the team and contributes to our mutual social credit.
Of course, you don’t need to use a fork, any token will do, so long as the understanding across the team is consistent and mutual. Such tokens have been in use for years. Ever since the 19th century, and remaining in use even amidst today’s modern computer-controlled signalling, railways have used the token to guarantee safe access to controlled sections of track to prevent collisions.