On 5/11/06, Ryan Leavengood <leavengood / gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/11/06, John Gabriele <jmg3000 / gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Not to take any sides, but I think I've heard the argument go: if
> > you're working on a team on a large project, and all of a sudden
> > "your" class breaks, management doesn't want to hear about someone
> > else opening your class... they'll just see your name on the class
> > causing the hold-up and then it *becomes* your problem.
>
> Oh come on now, if that company is using Ruby they will be using unit
> tests and I would hope, continuous integration and testing. Therefore
> if the unit tests for a class break, they won't "blame" the original
> author of that class, but whoever did the last submit.

Point well taken.

> [snip]
>
> > In the typical "enterprise scale" cubicle farm environment, team
> > leaders are constantly looking to find someone to blame for the
> > project being behind. B&D languages like Java lend themselves to rigid
> > compartmentalization that yields paper trails.
>
> Only bad team leaders or managers pull crap like that, and unless the
> whole company is rotten with bad management (which means it probably
> wouldn't last long), at some point someone is going to call those team
> leaders on their crap.

Sorry. I've got a pretty small sample size and shouldn't have written "typical".

> > It's interesting to think about the dynamic there -- between the
> > language and the cube farm.
>
> What I hope we'll see is all those "enterprise" companies and their
> cube farms and Java code eaten alive by small, dynamic, happy teams of
> Ruby coders who don't have to deal with all that nonsense.

Agreed.