6 ms·
Thanks, I feel that “Tech Debt” is an abused term to make mistakes sound like they’re not mistakes but something else to evade responsibility. If you fucked up
by louwrentius 5y ago
Thanks, I feel that “Tech Debt” is an abused term to make mistakes sound like they’re not mistakes but something else to evade responsibility.
If you fucked up, that’s not technical debt.
If business requirements change, you don’t have technical debt
Calling every problem or challenge technical debt is so unhelpful and frankly a bit dishonest too.
- _puk 5y agoProcess debt is another one I've invariably come across and covers the need for loose requirements (especially early on). There's a lot of technical debt that's going to accrue before the process debt is sorted if you're trying to scale quickly.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- louwrentius 5y agoIf you build with the explicit goal to learn and explore the process and problem domain, and then have to rework code because of new insights and understanding, we are as close to the original definition of technical debt. But it is my impression that this is the rare exception. In most cases, people are just bullshitting to cover up their ineptitude.
- nerdponx 5y agoI tend to use "tech debt" as a euphemism for other people's bad code and design decisions. Work politics.
- louwrentius 5y agoHa, I think that’s the most legit usage of the term.