3 ms·
This feels like self-pity. One can easily turn this argument on its head. What if operations people are the once that enable a bad situation to persist? As some
by DrDroop 3y ago
This feels like self-pity. One can easily turn this argument on its head. What if operations people are the once that enable a bad situation to persist? As someone who prefers to create new things over maintaining old ones, I sometimes think that is what operations is about, a codependent relation between shitty software and high functioning depressives, but then I remind myself not to psychoanalyse everything and move on.
- atoav 3y agoI think it is a typical "depends" situation. I also favour writing new things, but in practise there are many situations where this would be the act that makes you look like you enjoy pain. E.g. if you have legacy systems that cover and handle edge cases you didn't even know existed. If you build your new thing you are going to learn about them. Probably in production. Suddenly that fresh feeling of writing a new thing will be replaced by another, considerably worse feeling. It really depends on the problem your old thing is solving. If it is a simple problem, then a new thing can be a no-brainer. If that old tool is however interconnected with other things in a hundred places, good luck. If the problem you are solving is complex but very contained (e.g. just a tool that takes document X and transforms it into document Y), easy — wrire a new one. But I know many operational people who are genius at understanding their systems and tools, but are not good at developing software.
- wvveojvvw 3y ago[flagged]