3 ms·
It's not rewarded and recognized. Good software, bad doc is probably okay. Bad software, good doc is downright bad. Therefore, people/exec/management don't p
by ergocoder 5y ago
It's not rewarded and recognized.
Good software, bad doc is probably okay.
Bad software, good doc is downright bad.
Therefore, people/exec/management don't prioritize it.
If it were to be compensated with 100k, you would get the best doc ever.
We can't improve things if we don't incentivize. We don't incentivize because it's not that important.
- philosopher1234 5y agoWhat if we don’t incentivize and it’s important? Further, what if we can improve it without incentivizing? My teams code is very well documented because we encourage documentation during code review. No one gets a bonus for this, but it doesn’t matter because we care about our softwares quality. Put another way, good software bad doc is a lot harder and more costly than good software good doc.
- meowkit 5y agoAs you say your documentation is a part of the code review process. Getting your (I assume) PR through is an incentive. Totally agree with you otherwise.
- watwut 5y agoYour team is incentivizing it during code review.
- ergocoder 5y agoThat's just a negative incentive where you get punished if you don't write documentation. It works. But it's hard to be consistent. Let's say someone build a great feature with a lot of traction (e.g. money) but no doc. Will you punish the team or celebrate the success? "Sorry, your project make 20m, higher than any other projects in the company, but your doc is bad, so... you get below expectation rating this time". There are tons of successful software with very little doc. So, my imaginary situation is very plausible. On the other hand, bad software with good doc rarely succeeds. But tbf bad software means unsuccessful software....