[megadog3]

Counterpoint: The MVP is usually what ends up in production. If your code is a heap of garbage but chocolate-coated on the outside, you're gonna impress management and they'll want to push it live asap. Then the issues start exploding.

[cranberryturkey]

yes, a shitty foundation leads to shitty feature implementation. I've seen this everywhere from startups to Fortune 500 companies. Nobody cares about code quality, except maybe the one self-annointed gatekeeper who thinks he's making a difference and shitting on everyone's PRs delaying features. Get rid of that guy he serves no purpose

[vbezhenar]

That guy keeps everything from collapsing.

[sambazi]

involved conservationists and curators rarely get the recognition they deserve, but sometimes obstructionists are just that

[jampekka]

Yeah, if the indentation style, variable name capitalization rules, structure of commits, 100% unit test coverage the guy knows is the absolute truth and top priority, a collapse of everything is imminent.

[fireflash38]

People don't care about quality in general unless it affects the bottom line. Not just code quality, but product too. Bugs? Who cares unless it costs us money. Security holes? only a problem if they're exploited... And it costs us money.

[tkdev2]

Spoken like a true MBA. Hope I never have to work with you.

[fuzzy2]

Um, yeah, that's… IMHO exactly where an MVP is supposed to end up. The “VP” says that.