Define: code quality We're focused on getting things done, and I think that is a good focus and always has been more satisfying for engineers to see things shi

Define: code quality We're focused on getting things done, and I think that is a good focus and always has been more satisfying for engineers to see things ship. But... there are extremes at both ends of that scale that make for very bad places to work, and really bad product and code. Getting things done whilst not applying any focus to debt avoidance, maintainability, observability, supportability... is a recipe for disaster that leads to constant fire-fighting and the burning out of engineers and others. Yet building ivory towers of as close to perfect code equally is a bad signal that can kill a company (not bringing in revenue whilst having costs). Not all code is equal and some code requires a higher quality than other code. I've found that what experience has given me over 20 years is a pragmatism... is it constructive to add this nice-to-have thing, or would it bring more $$$ in at an acceptable TCO if I just do it sooner. The best engineers I know all strike a balance; keeping things simpler than a lot less experienced engineers would expect, and shipping something sooner.