4 ms·
One the other side, unless you are an artist and not dependant on your software actually being used, you have to get product out at some point. It's easy to de
by alacombe 8y ago
One the other side, unless you are an artist and not dependant on your software actually being used, you have to get product out at some point.
It's easy to demonize CEO and managers. We, as devs, will always find an excuse as to why the software is not ready and QA will always find new things to test to justify not putting the software out.
- Frost1x 8y agoIt depends on the real world effects of pushing software out. If the side effects are minor and its perfectionism, then sure, push it out ugly. If it's a safety control mechanism for a car or airplane, then perfectionism needs to be applauded over faster time-to-market. If it's another chat application and changes can be easily rolled back, then push it out warts and all.
- Gibbon1 8y agoI think that 'can safely ship' is primary feature of any software project. What the means in practice is it puts pressure on new features and 'refactoring'
- airbreather 8y agoIf you have fully defined what your software will do up front, then you are finished when have made it do what you said it would. Safety critical software is usually designed, built and tested to the V-model. When done properly every piece of logic/code can be traced back to a requirement through all steps and phases of development and testing. There is no "move fast and break things" in the safety instrumented field, the engineering hours per byte/instruction delivered would absolutely flabbergast most software devs, by many orders of magnitude.