Hardening sprint: why we did it, and why you shouldn't.
It is normal to have a hardening sprint to remove technical debt and prepare the product for release.
A potentially releasable product increment should be delivered by every sprint.We don't understand the concept of scrum and sprint if the team needs a separate sprint before the product release.
I prefer to pay my technical debt on a regular basis.We need a dedicated sprint for it if we accumulate it so much.
One of the questions in the simulation exam is about hardening, but the answer is no.
The metaphor of "debt" is used to describe this.Should technical debt be allowed to accumulate over multiple sprints?In order to remedy the poor decisions that were made, a so-called "hardening sprint" might be necessary.The increment of release quality should be produced by each sprint.The decisions should fit for purpose and technical debt should be limited.Is it possible that "hardening sprints" might encourage technical debt to be incurred in the first place?