Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #10662
| From | Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.java.programmer |
| Subject | Re: Two More Very General Consulting Question |
| References | (5 earlier) <4edffd56$0$286$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <mBTDq.11783$cG.7766@newsfe14.iad> <alpine.DEB.2.00.1112081541440.15036@urchin.earth.li> <SMlEq.17211$JE1.11242@newsfe21.iad> <2piplm9kbu.fsf@shell.xmission.com> |
| Message-ID | <9RkFq.23919$cN1.20090@newsfe12.iad> (permalink) |
| Organization | Public Usenet Newsgroup Access |
| Date | 2011-12-12 06:39 -0400 |
On 11-12-12 06:05 AM, Jim Janney wrote: > Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> writes: > >> 1. History is super-important in these organizations. It is how you >> locate scapegoats. > > History is an important working tool for me. It's the first thing I > look at when I want to know why a piece of code is written the way it is > rather than the way I think it should be, or the way I originally wrote > it. Fairly often there turns out to be a reason, usually tied to a > customer request. > I have a bunch of reasons for valuing history. One of the most important ones ties in with my role as a software consultant who usually works on fixing or adding to existing applications, and it is quite similar to yours: looking for the "why". More often than not there are either no requirements or design documents, or they are incorrect or obsolete, and so frequently the only place one can derive requirements for future work is in the existing code. This is actually part of an identified field of work; just Google on "business rules extraction". Although a lot of that field has to do with static analysis, if you've got good history available then there is clearly valuable information there too. Still, while you may have good reasons for valuing history, and I'd like to think that I do, and no doubt plenty of other developers have good reasons, a lot of places don't. You'll know when you're in a toxic place when people are much more interested in the "who" rather than the "why", and not so they can get the "why" from the horse's mouth either. AHS
Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Two More Very General Consulting Question Novice <novice@example..com> - 2011-11-30 21:00 +0000
Re: Two More Very General Consulting Question Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-11-30 21:45 +0000
Re: Two More Very General Consulting Question Novice <novice@example..com> - 2011-11-30 23:00 +0000
Re: Two More Very General Consulting Question Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-12-01 03:06 +0000
Re: Two More Very General Consulting Question Novice <novice@example..com> - 2011-12-06 15:24 +0000
Re: Two More Very General Consulting Question Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-12-06 20:59 +0000
Re: Two More Very General Consulting Question Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2011-12-07 05:45 -0800
Re: Two More Very General Consulting Question Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-12-07 18:58 +0000
Re: Two More Very General Consulting Question Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-12-07 18:57 -0500
Re: Two More Very General Consulting Question Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-12-07 20:33 -0400
Re: Two More Very General Consulting Question Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-12-08 16:04 +0000
Re: Two More Very General Consulting Question Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-12-09 06:53 -0400
Re: Two More Very General Consulting Question Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-12-09 12:51 +0000
Re: Two More Very General Consulting Question Lars Enderin <lars.enderin@telia.com> - 2011-12-09 17:26 +0100
Re: Two More Very General Consulting Question Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-12-09 23:12 +0000
Re: Two More Very General Consulting Question Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-12-10 12:00 +0000
Re: Two More Very General Consulting Question Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-12-10 19:53 +0000
Re: Two More Very General Consulting Question Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-12-11 00:04 +0000
Re: Two More Very General Consulting Question Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-12-10 20:12 +0000
Re: Two More Very General Consulting Question Jim Janney <jjanney@shell.xmission.com> - 2011-12-12 03:05 -0700
Re: Two More Very General Consulting Question Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-12-12 06:39 -0400
Re: Two More Very General Consulting Question Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-12-07 20:55 -0600
Re: Two More Very General Consulting Question Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-12-09 10:42 +0000
Re: Two More Very General Consulting Question Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-12-07 18:48 -0500
Re: Two More Very General Consulting Question Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2011-12-07 05:43 -0800
Re: Two More Very General Consulting Question Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-12-02 20:15 -0500
Re: Two More Very General Consulting Question Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2011-12-06 16:45 -0800
csiph-web