3 ms·
Right. If I understand it, it does seem to me to be an acceptable and reasonable solution, and I can't think of a better one. But isn't it the "shared stateful
by jrochkind1 6y ago
Right. If I understand it, it does seem to me to be an acceptable and reasonable solution, and I can't think of a better one.
But isn't it the "shared stateful development environment" the OP is saying is unacceptable? Since every developer doesn't get their own "last generation of hardware"?
But I may be misunderstanding the OP?
I am not trying to critisize what you did; I am trying to understand and possibly critique the OP. The OP seems unrealistic to me, despite it's protestations that it really isn't; but I may be misunderstnading the OP.
- benlivengood 6y agoShared stateful development environment implies that "hard-to-test" things are not tested. In that sense, sure; we had one active directory, one physical network, one physical workstation to trigger commands, one office chair, no test version of me, etc. So if the OP's language is not careful then it could include things in "the development environment" that don't make sense.