It's so weird that a lot of people think the quality of software is measured in how often it gets updated—it's literally the opposite.
Discussion
Loading...
@thomasfuchs thats exactly why i'm a big fan of #clojure and #lisp updates yes if necessary otherwise it just works.
@thomasfuchs Software as fashion, essentially. Change as a social status token.
@thomasfuchs A lot of developers will disagree with both statements. Without knowing any details, having good test coverage, single-responsibility functions and clean static and dynamic analysis results looks good. Updating the code base itself is not necessarily desirable, but keeping current on dependencies certainly is.
That just PMs justifying their existence.
@thomasfuchs agreed — there have been libraries I’ve stopped using because they were releasing multiple new versions a week, and backwards-incompatible major versions several times a year. Life’s too short to spend that much time thinking about pagination.
It’s not even that the updates were mandatory, but it just gives a strong sense that the developer isn’t stopping to think about what they’re doing.
@thomasfuchs you need to reach that sweetspot where it gets touched juuuuust enough to reassure the user it's not completely abandoned. Like it gets one, maybe two patches per year
brb, figuring out how to put this into my performance evaluation at work... 😆