3 ms·
> Neutral changes aren’t costly on our users, so while we should be somewhat averse to wasting time and adding tech debt for neutral changes, it isn’t the end o
by tqi 4y ago
> Neutral changes aren’t costly on our users, so while we should be somewhat averse to wasting time and adding tech debt for neutral changes, it isn’t the end of the world.
While I think most of the points in the post are reasonable, I strongly disagree with the idea that neutral changes aren't costly. Some neutral changes are good because they are a part of a larger strategy or vision, but in my experience most neutral features are simply change for changes sake. Any reasonablely large company that ships all/most neutral tests is going to end up feeling like a bloated, unfocused mess.
- bookish 4y agoDoes the sentence imply that they aren't costly? Would you write "strongly averse" instead of "somewhat averse" or "it is the end of the world" instead of "it isn't the end of the world"? If so, what language would you use to convey that strongly negative changes are that much worse than neutral ones?