Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 10:46:10 -0400 From: Lawrence Sica <lomion@mac.com> To: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> Cc: FreeBSD Chat <freebsd-chat@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: What does "enterpise" mean? Message-ID: <66AA428D-BD1C-11D7-9CD0-000393A335A2@mac.com> In-Reply-To: <3F1E1B3A.7EABD098@mindspring.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wednesday, July 23, 2003, at 01:20 AM, Terry Lambert wrote: > <snipped some> > The PHB's aren't always right, and they aren't always wrong. It's > probably more correct, overall, to keep your developers in suspense, > so that they can't try to look too far ahead; three months of some > amount of uncertainty, where the developer's favorite feature may > or may not get in if they let implementing it drag out too long is > probably a good balance. It gives you a good three months in which > the only code that's going to get done is the code that needs to > get done to clear bugs, rather than cram in new features. > Yes, I deal with this everyday. But in reverse, we have too short release cycles at work due to idiotic scheduling on the part of project managers and no enough manpower to deal with it. It is frustrating at times because I usually hear it first, not the product development people. > My first boss out of college taught me something that I've never > forgotten, and it's always stood me in good stead: "Eventually, a > software company has to ship software". I may have left that > company behind a long time ago (after helping take it from just 2 > employees to 18 employees), but that lesson has really stuck with > me and shaped my idea of acceptable practice. > That fits nicely with the "Good Enough" theory. Where at some point you have to decide that the product is good enough for a release so you can actually make some money. It is a tough balance though finding that sweet spot. --Larry
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?66AA428D-BD1C-11D7-9CD0-000393A335A2>