3 ms·
> A programmer should be able to checkout, build, run in minutes and then to start fixing bugs on day 1. I have never met a programmer who could do that. I'm s
by PhasmaFelis 10y ago
> A programmer should be able to checkout, build, run in minutes and then to start fixing bugs on day 1.
I have never met a programmer who could do that. I'm sure some of them can, in specific domains. But I'd consider expecting that to be a huge red flag: I've worked at exactly one place that expected a day 1 hire to match their veteran coders, and I wouldn't work there again.
- flukus 10y agoTo be clear, I wouldn't expect them to match the veterans, or even to fix anything, but they should be able to get started on a simple issue given decent reproduction steps. My main objection was that there shouldn't be 3 months of negative or near zero productivity. Or there should at least be a good reason for it.
- wastedhours 10y agoWhilst being helpful is one thing, if you can't afford to give people a proper amount of time to bed in (3 months doesn't seem unreasonable), then you might hurt your chances of retention going forwards as well - depending on the size of the org of course, but there's plenty of places where to really understand the business needs to make informed decisions, it takes a long time. If you fail that step, then staying for any reasonable amount of time becomes untenable.
- joncrocks 10y agoI'd note that this could be seen as much as a statement about the organisation one is moving into as to the skill of the programmer involved. i.e. If it takes someone 3 months to be productive, there's probably something wrong with the build system/documentation, or code organisation/structure (+ comments, or lack of), lots of knowledge in people's heads etc.