Unfortunately I can't have that chat ever. I'm the one (in most of my career, not now) responsible for telling my folks what the customer wants, and not in a sales way.
Oh, they can, they will just force some other poor programmer to read your code and figure it out. A profoundly miserable process, but someone is willing to do it.
I’ve seen a “temporary fix” serve as a core element of a service stack for a company with annual revenue in the hundreds of millions for like at least 5 years.
My conversation with the moronic MBAs that lead my org today. Who cares about doing impactful work when we can just do useless busy work that makes the nontechnical morons happy.
I loved agile as an analyst, we used to use waterfall and you'd hear about incorrect designs months later, or not at all, where in agile you can work out the details with the programmers and get both nearer the business requirements, and better designs
Also I absolutely love the job of scrum master which had no equivalent in waterfall
I love waterfall as an developer, I’m using agile now and we have incomplete, conflicting designs every sprint, or spills which affect our metrics, where in waterfall you can workout all the details and have full vision of product and better design with less reworks.
Not to mock you. My point is that methodology is not import when team consists from responsible professionals
I think a lot of it dependent on management. If you have a good product manager, software architect (or whatever) who can have things solidly designed before sending it to development, agile works great. But if the people writing the cards suck at their job, well then the project isn't going to go well.
But then bad management is going to suck no matter what methodology is used.
You're right on. We have some good expertise left over from our previous methodology which was both waterfall and siloed so bad feature documents don't cause too much problem, but once our expertise retires (and we're not makeing new experts as the silos were removed) the features will need to great to get decent products
And bad management is the biggest thing to make a job miserable
I don't take it as mocking or anything, I know that some devs in my team preferred waterfall. I'm just saying there are aspects of agile I really enjoy
Waterfall makes higher quality software in many circumstances. It's optimised for quality.
Agile is optimised for speed explicitly at the expense of quality. Whatever methodology you can only pick two between development speed, cost, and quality
I've had this conversation:
We need to increase our velocity! Has the customer told us yet what they would like us to build?
Unfortunately I can't have that chat ever. I'm the one (in most of my career, not now) responsible for telling my folks what the customer wants, and not in a sales way.
You can fix it later, but that doesn't mean you're going to.
Nothing's more permanent than a temporary solution.
They can't fire you if you're the only one who can fix your shit...
Oh, they can, they will just force some other poor programmer to read your code and figure it out. A profoundly miserable process, but someone is willing to do it.
my heart goes out to the poor soul who tries to make sense of my code
Later there will be other projects, other fires.
I’ve seen a “temporary fix” serve as a core element of a service stack for a company with annual revenue in the hundreds of millions for like at least 5 years.
mmmm spaghetti code
"Boss, most of the bricks we have are broken in pieces. We can't build the wall per specifications."
"We have a deadline, get it done however possible by the end of the day today."
My conversation with the moronic MBAs that lead my org today. Who cares about doing impactful work when we can just do useless busy work that makes the nontechnical morons happy.
You have a problem with agile methodology, you have a problem with me, and I suggest you let that one marinate.
there’s a special place in heaven for kanban lovers that’s what i always say
To be faiiiiiir, it’s is the easiests of the ways of workins.
To be faaaaaaiiiiirrr...
To be faaaaaaaiiiiiiiiir 🎵
Why?
I loved agile as an analyst, we used to use waterfall and you'd hear about incorrect designs months later, or not at all, where in agile you can work out the details with the programmers and get both nearer the business requirements, and better designs
Also I absolutely love the job of scrum master which had no equivalent in waterfall
I love waterfall as an developer, I’m using agile now and we have incomplete, conflicting designs every sprint, or spills which affect our metrics, where in waterfall you can workout all the details and have full vision of product and better design with less reworks.
Not to mock you. My point is that methodology is not import when team consists from responsible professionals
I think a lot of it dependent on management. If you have a good product manager, software architect (or whatever) who can have things solidly designed before sending it to development, agile works great. But if the people writing the cards suck at their job, well then the project isn't going to go well.
But then bad management is going to suck no matter what methodology is used.
You're right on. We have some good expertise left over from our previous methodology which was both waterfall and siloed so bad feature documents don't cause too much problem, but once our expertise retires (and we're not makeing new experts as the silos were removed) the features will need to great to get decent products
And bad management is the biggest thing to make a job miserable
I don't take it as mocking or anything, I know that some devs in my team preferred waterfall. I'm just saying there are aspects of agile I really enjoy
Waterfall makes higher quality software in many circumstances. It's optimised for quality.
Agile is optimised for speed explicitly at the expense of quality. Whatever methodology you can only pick two between development speed, cost, and quality
drunk brick
https://www.stlouis.style/design/drunk-brick-hollywood-bond-clayton/
About the pic itself, laying bricks like that can't be structurally sound... am I right?
drunk brick or Hollywood bond
That's actually a nice CSS.
No conflict is for the weak.
💪
just keep coding, your employer will outsource you the very moment i seems convenient
Is there some reason that wall won't work fine?
It could also have less integrity (like my code) overall due to non uniform weight displacement. But I’m not an engineer.
Paint it, a lot of paint, I mean layers upon layers of paint
should work fine if there is no load on it , this seems deliberate for the look
Ah the well known technical debt
The trick is to get some else to shit the 🧱 when it hits the fan.
with lease?