4 ms·

I can hear cries from tenderfoot developers whining about supporting multiple options and backwards compatibility... "But that's sooooo muuuuch too teeessstt!!

by tomc1985 6y ago

I can hear cries from tenderfoot developers whining about supporting multiple options and backwards compatibility... "But that's sooooo muuuuch too teeessstt!! Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!!!!!!" But that's your job dude. So what if it costs more money and time. Fucking pay for it anyway. I feel like startup software dev needs a swift kick in the ass or three with that phrase.... "do it anyway!" Who fucking cares if these founder assholes only make an 800% return instead of 900%? Do it right.

dmitriid 6y ago
You didn't read the article, did you? Startup developers don't mind supporting multiple options and backwards compatibility. Often they have to because they don't have the time and the money to rewrite everything, so it's common in startups to run and support multiple versions of APIs, clients etc. It's Google who doesn't provide backwards compatibility, upgrade paths and migration options. > But that's your job dude. So what if it costs more money and time. Fucking pay for it anyway. So why doesn't Google pay for it anyway? > I feel like startup software dev needs a swift kick in the ass or three with that phrase.... "do it anyway!" You mean Google devs.
- tomc1985 6y ago
  I read the whole article. My reaction is such because I feel that much of software dev is plagued by the same bullshit that the article describes about Google I've been on the web since the mid 90s. The last 15 years have had more cool things taken away from me because of sunset bullshit than the first half of that time period. Software (even web apps) should be eternal, there should never be "features removed" or "EOL" announcements. If they don't want to run something they should open source it and let the community take over. What the hell is the point of hoarding all this wonderful IP if it serves noone?

4 ms·

I can hear cries from tenderfoot developers whining about supporting multiple options and backwards compatibility... "But that's sooooo muuuuch too teeessstt!!

by tomc1985 6y ago

dmitriid 6y ago
You didn't read the article, did you? Startup developers don't mind supporting multiple options and backwards compatibility. Often they have to because they don't have the time and the money to rewrite everything, so it's common in startups to run and support multiple versions of APIs, clients etc. It's Google who doesn't provide backwards compatibility, upgrade paths and migration options. > But that's your job dude. So what if it costs more money and time. Fucking pay for it anyway. So why doesn't Google pay for it anyway? > I feel like startup software dev needs a swift kick in the ass or three with that phrase.... "do it anyway!" You mean Google devs.
- tomc1985 6y ago
  I read the whole article. My reaction is such because I feel that much of software dev is plagued by the same bullshit that the article describes about Google I've been on the web since the mid 90s. The last 15 years have had more cool things taken away from me because of sunset bullshit than the first half of that time period. Software (even web apps) should be eternal, there should never be "features removed" or "EOL" announcements. If they don't want to run something they should open source it and let the community take over. What the hell is the point of hoarding all this wonderful IP if it serves noone?