3 ms·
> refactors, performance improvements, etc, are almost never appropriately rewarded or prioritized Another variant that I've seen: actual refinements and impro
by ploxiln 4y ago
> refactors, performance improvements, etc, are almost never appropriately rewarded or prioritized
Another variant that I've seen: actual refinements and improvements just aren't simple enough to sell to management, or to new junior devs. So they'll be all excited about switching over to the next big framework that finally makes things fast and refreshing, for the first time ever! But the migration still has some bugs that haven't been worked out and some features that haven't been ported ... and a year later things are actually worse than where we started, so repeat with the next big framework that finally makes good software possible for the first time!
- potatolicious 4y agoThis is a huge failure of management where it occurs - and one of the chief causes for it is short leadership tenure. Places where leadership remains stable over long periods tend to do better on this front. You pay for some big architectural overhaul, but you insist that you live on the new thing long enough to actually ship features before you go into the next cycle of renewal. But in some companies leadership tenure is short - execs stick around for 2-3 years max, which is just enough time to complete an architectural migration but not enough to ship stuff on it!