3 ms·
I should clarify: my opinion doesn't have anything to do with the use of shiny new tech. I think using tried-and-true tech stacks is perfectly sensible. My comm
by overgard 12y ago
I should clarify: my opinion doesn't have anything to do with the use of shiny new tech. I think using tried-and-true tech stacks is perfectly sensible. My commentary has to do with the impression that engineers there are not trusted to make those decisions.
- stephenr 12y agoIf 230 "engineers" all make choices about tech in use, you end up with a fucking nightmare mess of every imaginable tech stack mixed and matched. It says very clearly they will use new things when the benefit can be shown. So it still just sounds like you don't like that you would need to prove why you're changing something on a whim, because "oh this is better" doesn't cut it Edit: fixed weirdest typo/autocorrect weirdness ever.
- overgard 12y agoWell, trust is a very important part of a working relationship. I don't change things willy nilly for fun because I wouldn't want to betray my employers trust in me. I've been in high-freedom situations in companies with lots of engineers, and you know what? Chaos did not ensue. Professional pride, interest in being able to collaborate with others, etc tended to reign things in just fine. The article, to my perspective, suggests a situation in which there is very little trust towards their employees. Having seen both ends of the spectrum, I wouldn't want to work in an environment like that.