3 ms·

Which is not how the term is being used in the article. But also "technically questionable decisions for the sake of reducing development time and costs" does n

by unabst 10y ago

Which is not how the term is being used in the article. But also "technically questionable decisions for the sake of reducing development time and costs" does not automatically become debt. Technically questionable decisions happen regardless so debt can be incurred without intending to save any money, and reducing development time and cost can be done without questionable decisions so without incurring any debt. The article uses Docker as an example of "remodeling" which could very well be a technically questionable decision, because their argument for it is that it saves a lot of money (and is not a technical argument, which is why it could be technically questionable). So in a sense, they're actively promoting technical debt because they're choosing their tools based on cost. They should rename their method from "remodeling" to "debt restructuring" or "refinancing". Of course, the middleman always gets paid.

catnaroek 10y ago
> does not automatically become debt. It becomes technical debt. Just like financial debt costs you the interest rate times the amount owed, technical debt costs you time and resources spent on refactoring and cleaning up the code, rather than on activities that directly increase revenue, say, adding new features. One thing that makes technical debt particularly problematic is that you can incur in it without knowing it. Unlike the case with financial debt, where it's impossible to “accidentally” borrow money. But, just because technical debt is hard to measure, it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. > reducing development time and cost can be done without questionable decisions so without incurring any debt. In principle, yes. In practice, the most common way to reduce development costs, at least in the short term, is to incur in technical debt. > They should rename their method from "remodeling" to "debt restructuring" or "refinancing". Of course, the middleman always gets paid. No disagreement here.
- dragonwriter 10y ago
  > One thing that makes technical debt particularly problematic is that you can incur in it without knowing it. Unlike the case with financial debt, where it's impossible to “accidentally” borrow money. Debt doesn't occur only because of agreements to borrow, it can occur because you've incurred a liability by some other means. Which, yes, can occur accidentally. Indeed, cutting development corners arguably risks incurring technical debt that will manifest concretely later in a process much more like cutting physical construction corners might risk negligence liability down the road and less like deliberate, planned debt financing vs. paying cash upfront for construction.
  - catnaroek 10y ago
    Good point. I hadn't considered that possibility.

by unabst 10y ago

catnaroek 10y ago

> does not automatically become debt. It becomes technical debt. Just like financial debt costs you the interest rate times the amount owed, technical debt costs you time and resources spent on refactoring and cleaning up the code, rather than on activities that directly increase revenue, say, adding new features. One thing that makes technical debt particularly problematic is that you can incur in it without knowing it. Unlike the case with financial debt, where it's impossible to “accidentally” borrow money. But, just because technical debt is hard to measure, it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. > reducing development time and cost can be done without questionable decisions so without incurring any debt. In principle, yes. In practice, the most common way to reduce development costs, at least in the short term, is to incur in technical debt. > They should rename their method from "remodeling" to "debt restructuring" or "refinancing". Of course, the middleman always gets paid. No disagreement here.

dragonwriter 10y ago
> One thing that makes technical debt particularly problematic is that you can incur in it without knowing it. Unlike the case with financial debt, where it's impossible to “accidentally” borrow money. Debt doesn't occur only because of agreements to borrow, it can occur because you've incurred a liability by some other means. Which, yes, can occur accidentally. Indeed, cutting development corners arguably risks incurring technical debt that will manifest concretely later in a process much more like cutting physical construction corners might risk negligence liability down the road and less like deliberate, planned debt financing vs. paying cash upfront for construction.
- catnaroek 10y ago
  Good point. I hadn't considered that possibility.