3 ms·
OK, so according to him there's code review and some automated tests. But that still doesn't address wide open access to the live DB by brand-new devs, and the
by pak 16y ago
OK, so according to him there's code review and some automated tests.
But that still doesn't address wide open access to the live DB by brand-new devs, and the complete disregard for having a dedicated QA team.
Why QA? I would think FB engineers are more busy doing real work at work than fooling around on their own site (heh, the irony) and finding out that Junior Dev 39's change to the thingamabob broke chat for the umpteenth time in IE7. And as many people have pointed out here, they are a platform for many other businesses now--there's no dogfooding that--and the API stinks in terms of stability and documentation.
- aamar 16y agoIt's easy to dogfood an API. Not saying that FB does, but it's easy to.
- pak 16y agoIt depends. If your API was built underneath your own site, then it's easy. FB's API doesn't seem to actually support anything on the main site, e.g., I doubt their own "apps" actually run on the FB Apps API. And there's no incentive for any of the engineers to build them like that, because they have such lateral access to internal code and data.