4 ms·

I honestly disagree with a lot of these points. shipping software means compromise, most of these points are basically "don't compromise on X".

danparsonson 3y ago
Shipping software means comprises but compromising everything will result in a failure. You surely wouldn't argue that companies should compromise on developer machine specs, for example? Too many organisations cheap out somewhere on the development process in the name of "efficiency", and this article is arguing (and I agree) that that's short-sighted and will cause more trouble than it saves in the long run.
- PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y ago
  I wonder if there's at term for this type of repsonse. I most obviously did not say, or mean, every piece of software shipped must have every single part of it compromised in some manner.
  - danparsonson 3y ago
    My mistake. I read > shipping software means compromise, most of these points are basically "don't compromise on X". as, you disagree with a lot of the article because it's telling you not to compromise on some things and compromises are necessary for software development. That only logically works if you're also saying that compromises are necessary everywhere, doesn't it? Otherwise what's to disagree on? If you're saying compromise may be required on any of items 1 through 10, and I'm telling you not to compromise on 1-5, well then 6-10 are your zones of flexibility.
    - PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y ago
      I certainly don't think the 12 points brought up in the article are everything and therefore any interpretation of my comment as applying to everything is unreasonable. If your stance is "always do X" then you can replace yourself with a post-it note. Just write "always do X" on the post-it note, then when you have a decision point, refer to it. You're done. Actual engineering is about weaving through constraints and goals and that often implies compromises. Someone who can do that well cannot be replaced by a post-it note. And guess what "always compromise" can also be placed on a post-it note so very obviously that is not what I'm saying. don't be replace-able by a post-it note.

danparsonson 3y ago

Shipping software means comprises but compromising everything will result in a failure. You surely wouldn't argue that companies should compromise on developer machine specs, for example? Too many organisations cheap out somewhere on the development process in the name of "efficiency", and this article is arguing (and I agree) that that's short-sighted and will cause more trouble than it saves in the long run.

PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y ago
I wonder if there's at term for this type of repsonse. I most obviously did not say, or mean, every piece of software shipped must have every single part of it compromised in some manner.
- danparsonson 3y ago
  My mistake. I read > shipping software means compromise, most of these points are basically "don't compromise on X". as, you disagree with a lot of the article because it's telling you not to compromise on some things and compromises are necessary for software development. That only logically works if you're also saying that compromises are necessary everywhere, doesn't it? Otherwise what's to disagree on? If you're saying compromise may be required on any of items 1 through 10, and I'm telling you not to compromise on 1-5, well then 6-10 are your zones of flexibility.
  - PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y ago
    I certainly don't think the 12 points brought up in the article are everything and therefore any interpretation of my comment as applying to everything is unreasonable. If your stance is "always do X" then you can replace yourself with a post-it note. Just write "always do X" on the post-it note, then when you have a decision point, refer to it. You're done. Actual engineering is about weaving through constraints and goals and that often implies compromises. Someone who can do that well cannot be replaced by a post-it note. And guess what "always compromise" can also be placed on a post-it note so very obviously that is not what I'm saying. don't be replace-able by a post-it note.