Significantly better than the stuck-up architect who refactors on a whim and breaks functionality because their approach is “better.” These things can, and should, take time.
Significantly better than the stuck-up architect who refactors on a whim and breaks functionality because their approach is “better.” These things can, and should, take time.
I like the idea of keeping a list maintained of which long term refactors are ongoing. I've done most of the rest with reasonable success and had good buy-in from other developers at the time we...
I like the idea of keeping a list maintained of which long term refactors are ongoing.
I've done most of the rest with reasonable success and had good buy-in from other developers at the time we originally discussed it, but it's all too easy for it to become hidden institutional knowledge over time because it was an orphaned wiki page among dozens of other irrelevant pages.
Then a new starter copies patterns from the wrong part of the codebase and you don't pick up on it until the PR and they have to redo it all, which is demoralising for everyone involved.
Significantly better than the stuck-up architect who refactors on a whim and breaks functionality because their approach is “better.” These things can, and should, take time.
I like the idea of keeping a list maintained of which long term refactors are ongoing.
I've done most of the rest with reasonable success and had good buy-in from other developers at the time we originally discussed it, but it's all too easy for it to become hidden institutional knowledge over time because it was an orphaned wiki page among dozens of other irrelevant pages.
Then a new starter copies patterns from the wrong part of the codebase and you don't pick up on it until the PR and they have to redo it all, which is demoralising for everyone involved.