3 ms·

"building it properly" This strikes me as funny: what could "properly" mean to an industry if a successfully launched and operational piece of software serving

"building it properly" This strikes me as funny: what could "properly" mean to an industry if a successfully launched and operational piece of software serving clients globally somehow doesn't meet the requirements. I think this talk of "proper" is just purism, its not grounded in reality or sound engineering practices. The article should be lauded as kicking off a new era of practical engineering that rejects software purism.

lucianbr 3y ago
One of the requirements could be maintainability, and the fact that is launched and operational and serving clients globally tells you nothing about that. You're basically arguing there is no such thing as tech debt, if a software works, then there can be nothing wrong with it. I would think this is obviously false.
Jare 3y ago
It's a live service. If it "serves clients globally" with the minimal basic functionality at launch, then that's a valid launch. But that's achieved by being a mess under the hood ("technical debt"-like stuff), it probably is expensive to operate, hard and brittle to maintain, and very difficult and slow to extend and expand. That hardly meets all the requirements of a global and ambitious live service that has to move fast to gain traction against established, experienced and aggressive competitors. It's a valid tradeoff and a successful launch, but it's ok to say it's "not properly built" for what comes next.
- vouwfietsman 3y ago
  "technical debt"-like stuff Again, what is this based on. Mostly on the fact that they reused existing parts to build a new service? Why is this alone something to frown upon and conclude it is achieved by being "a mess under the hood"? Maybe it is a mess, maybe it isn't. There's no reason to conclude this, other than the fact that there was reuse. Hence purism. EDIT: actually the software devs mention introducing tech-debt themselves, my bad.
orf 3y ago
This infoq.com article about a pile of apparently hastily built technical debt is going to “kick off a new era of practical engineering” where everyone “rejects software purism”? They are not selling shrink-wrapped software. “Operational” is a moving, evolving target.
acchow 3y ago
There is a wide spectrum between “purity” and “// hackhackhack” everywhere.

lucianbr 3y ago

One of the requirements could be maintainability, and the fact that is launched and operational and serving clients globally tells you nothing about that. You're basically arguing there is no such thing as tech debt, if a software works, then there can be nothing wrong with it. I would think this is obviously false.

Jare 3y ago

It's a live service. If it "serves clients globally" with the minimal basic functionality at launch, then that's a valid launch. But that's achieved by being a mess under the hood ("technical debt"-like stuff), it probably is expensive to operate, hard and brittle to maintain, and very difficult and slow to extend and expand. That hardly meets all the requirements of a global and ambitious live service that has to move fast to gain traction against established, experienced and aggressive competitors. It's a valid tradeoff and a successful launch, but it's ok to say it's "not properly built" for what comes next.

vouwfietsman 3y ago
"technical debt"-like stuff Again, what is this based on. Mostly on the fact that they reused existing parts to build a new service? Why is this alone something to frown upon and conclude it is achieved by being "a mess under the hood"? Maybe it is a mess, maybe it isn't. There's no reason to conclude this, other than the fact that there was reuse. Hence purism. EDIT: actually the software devs mention introducing tech-debt themselves, my bad.

orf 3y ago

This infoq.com article about a pile of apparently hastily built technical debt is going to “kick off a new era of practical engineering” where everyone “rejects software purism”? They are not selling shrink-wrapped software. “Operational” is a moving, evolving target.

acchow 3y ago

There is a wide spectrum between “purity” and “// hackhackhack” everywhere.