5 ms·
"ship ship ship" is hard when it comes to hardware. As for the software side of things, I'd say "QA", but I find the dev/release cycles at these major phone/ta
by drivebyacct2 15y ago
"ship ship ship" is hard when it comes to hardware.
As for the software side of things, I'd say "QA", but I find the dev/release cycles at these major phone/tablet manufacturers to be unbelievably slow. As in, I really don't understand what they're doing a lot of the time. 5 volunteers working on CM can fix and implement features in the time it takes Motorola's team to do a `git merge` on Android and push it out to their phones (yes, even non-Blur phones).
- thaumaturgy 15y agoI wonder if a lot of what we read about software development methodology is to blame for this? I would expect that individual and freelance developers, and developers at small companies, are more likely to practice "cowboy programming" -- use frameworks, glue them together, write code, handle (most) edge cases, exercise the most basic of best practices -- while larger companies, like Motorola, are more likely to practice something that a manager read about in a book or a consultant sold them on -- "waterfall development", "test-driven development", etc. (Not that I have anything against those methods, but they would tend to slow down development in a corporate environment.)
- drivebyacct2 15y agoI'm not sure it's so cut and dry. If you look at how CM releases are managed... they're very well done. Nightly build servers, good communication on their GitHub and Gerrit, very stable builds considering their nightly builds, all the dozens of phones exist as the larger CM project. I know you were speaking more generally, but I don't know that one or the other is always better, whether it's speed or style or development workflow.