|
|
|
|
|
by usrbinbash
1082 days ago
|
|
> A substantial rewrite is developers asking for a do-over, which is infantile behavior That depends entirely on the reasons why they ask for a rewrite. "I like this tech better", "I don't want to work with this tech", "This new tech is shinier": I agree with you, those are not solid engineering reasons. "This doesn't interface well with the rest of the system because...", "This is going to cost us in the future because, ...", "This won't scale well because..."; I strongly disagree. You may notice that the operative difference here is the term "because". If someone can give a quantifieable, technical, verifieable reason for a rebuild, then management should at least hear the guy out. They can still say no. But then the engineer did his job, and if the whole show goes haywire later because the 14 year old Java backend fails to scale up and the company loses money over that, nobody can say he didn't warn them. |
|
If an engineer propose that the only way to solve scalability problems is to rewrite everything from the ground up, it just tell you they haven't been able to identify the root cause of the problem. The rewrite will probably end up having he same problem.