5 ms·
Suppose the OP leaves. It's going to be hard for the his former coworkers to maintain the Ruby app.
by zasz 15y ago
Suppose the OP leaves. It's going to be hard for the his former coworkers to maintain the Ruby app.
- tricolon 15y agoIf the OP did a proper job documenting his work and his former coworkers are competent, it would only be a tiny bit selfish.
- numeromancer 15y agoAnd it is not unlikely that there is somebody else looking for an opportunity to put Ruby experience on her resume, and will gladly take on the maintenance. In that case you have created value for your co-workers, too.
- dpritchett 15y ago$30,000 hard, or minor annoyance hard?
- zasz 15y agoDepends on how competent his coworkers are.
- chc 15y agoMaybe "one-off" means something different where you're from, but I read it as meaning this wasn't an issue.
- zasz 15y agoA classic mistake people make is assuming that something isn't an issue, when the other party DOES think it is an issue.
- chc 15y agoIf you think the maintainability of a one-off script that's probably already been deleted because its job is done is that crucial, you're simply nuts. If it needs to be maintained, then by definition it is not a one-off.
- nc 15y agoHard for them to maintain, or they wouldn't be as inclined to, if it were written in their language du jour?
- HeyLaughingBoy 15y agoUltimately everybody leaves. Does this mean you should never change your language or technology stack? Do what gets the job done, within reasonable limits. If the expected maintenance is minimal and you can improve your personal capability and/or produce the deliverable faster using a different technology, by all means go for it. I've had to learn languages far more unpleasant than Ruby (VBA, I'm looking right at you!!) in order to maintain programs that no one expected would ever change. That's life!
- invalidOrTaken 15y agoIf management would like easy-to-maintain software, they are free to start prioritizing it.