|
|
|
|
|
by akamaka
1915 days ago
|
|
It seems inevitable that much of the practical knowledge is lost. Look at how few old sailing ships survive, despite that being the most advanced transportation technology for centuries. The schematics of the engines will survive, but future generations who study them will struggle to understand the design choices that went into them. I’m happy that might change in the world of software, since so much collaboration is done online, and future historians will have troves of JIRA tickets to dig through. |
|
> I’m happy that might change in the world of software, since so much collaboration is done online, and future historians will have troves of JIRA tickets to dig through.
I doubt it. In my experience, JIRA tickets don't capture much information like that. Also, my employer at least has trouble maintaining actual design documents over the long term [1] that stuff that everyone views as transient has pretty much no chance.
Also, a lot of collaboration tools, while technically being more archiveable (e.g. slack, typical meeting recordings), are in practice so disorganized that they are rarely even useful as a long term reference for the teams that use them. Unless the team's software is truly world changing, I don't think any historians would bother.
Personally, I think the kinds of very formal processes that are unfashionable in the world of software are the ones that are most capable of capturing the reasoning behind design choices for future generations.
[1] stuff is spread across so many places, and a lot gets when we migrate from one enterprise collaboration system to another, or as teams reorganize.