2 ms·

Two people with 15 years experience will have experienced a different 15 years. Both are usually more valuable brought together. If you make one of those peopl

by pydry 4y ago

Two people with 15 years experience will have experienced a different 15 years. Both are usually more valuable brought together. If you make one of those people the "God of architecture" you're not only going to piss off the other one you will probably lose the benefit of their experience. If theyre not responsible for architecture they'll pay commensurately less attention to it. Thats a waste of a salary. The only scenario I can think of where it to promote one above all others would really be worth it would be if you otherwise cant stop the team from bickering. As for juniors - if anything I tend to feel like theyre too deferent even when encouraged to speak up and take ownership. The only exception is when they dont realize they are making an architectural decision.

falcolas 4y ago
If they’re professional, the second person will go “yeah, i can see why you’d do that, lets go with it”. If a developer, especially a senior developer throws a hissy fit, they’re a Diva and toxic, not a Senior Developer.
- pydry 4y ago
  You think two professionals will agree on all decisions all the time?
  - falcolas 4y ago
    No. But professionals will communicate and compromise - not throw a hissy fit over disagreements.
- recursivedoubts 4y ago
  the ability to sublimate your own ego in development is a tragically underrated skill
- taylodl 4y ago
  Exactly. Any Senior Developer who's actually earned that title and has the battle scars to prove it knows that there is no perfect architecture, there are simply sets of compromises. It's trade-offs and compromises all the way down. There's always somebody who looks at some little bit of the overall architecture & design and complains that it's not perfect and then use that to extrapolate that the entirety of the architecture sucks. Don't even get me started on Conway's Law. I'm so tired of people proposing "fixes" to architecture that simply can't be supported by the existing organization. Your architecture is crap if your organization can't support it, period end. Your architecture is also crap if it doesn't meet the expectations of the stakeholders. So architects have to manage those expectations as well. Then there's always the developer who wants to use the latest shiny and new technology so they can put it on their CV. Architects have to manage all that and then some. Yet the agilists preach that architecture is going to simply "emerge." Ha! The only architecture I've ever seen emerge is of the same nature of what emerges from one's rear end! At the end of the day you need one person responsible for the architecture and design of the system. You just need to make sure that person isn't a diva and seeks and listens to feedback and concerns from the development team. Good architects are worth their weight in gold.

by pydry 4y ago

falcolas 4y ago

If they’re professional, the second person will go “yeah, i can see why you’d do that, lets go with it”. If a developer, especially a senior developer throws a hissy fit, they’re a Diva and toxic, not a Senior Developer.

pydry 4y ago
You think two professionals will agree on all decisions all the time?
- falcolas 4y ago
  No. But professionals will communicate and compromise - not throw a hissy fit over disagreements.
recursivedoubts 4y ago
the ability to sublimate your own ego in development is a tragically underrated skill
taylodl 4y ago
Exactly. Any Senior Developer who's actually earned that title and has the battle scars to prove it knows that there is no perfect architecture, there are simply sets of compromises. It's trade-offs and compromises all the way down. There's always somebody who looks at some little bit of the overall architecture & design and complains that it's not perfect and then use that to extrapolate that the entirety of the architecture sucks. Don't even get me started on Conway's Law. I'm so tired of people proposing "fixes" to architecture that simply can't be supported by the existing organization. Your architecture is crap if your organization can't support it, period end. Your architecture is also crap if it doesn't meet the expectations of the stakeholders. So architects have to manage those expectations as well. Then there's always the developer who wants to use the latest shiny and new technology so they can put it on their CV. Architects have to manage all that and then some. Yet the agilists preach that architecture is going to simply "emerge." Ha! The only architecture I've ever seen emerge is of the same nature of what emerges from one's rear end! At the end of the day you need one person responsible for the architecture and design of the system. You just need to make sure that person isn't a diva and seeks and listens to feedback and concerns from the development team. Good architects are worth their weight in gold.