Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 11 years ago.
Improve this question
Hey, I've built a project over the course of a year. I've put in a lot of hours into it, and it has come out great. A bunch of people use it, and a bunch of people write plugins for it. However, I have since moved on to different languages, different styles, the codebase is dirty and hackish, and I'm not sure I want to continue working in the framework I built it in.
When do you know that you should shut down a project and move on?
When you don't want to work on it anymore. Have you thought about open sourcing it so the community of users could continue to support it if they wanted?
Once you have lost inspiration and a project starts to get boring and you are to the point you can't get much or anymore experience from the project it's time to move on. If a project's codebase is too screwed up to fix then it's time to move on. If people use it and people write plugins for it, I'd personally make the project open source and turn it over to the community to continue otherwise just end it.
Find a new maintainer since it's already open source. Ask for a volunteer. If they like it they will surely jump at the opportunity to maintain it.
If you are sure you are ready to leave the project, then you can do so, but you should consider your users first. They still find it useful; they have contributed hours of work to write the plugins.
So, your first imperative is to make sure that those who want to use what they find useful can still do so, and can still enhance it. So, ask for a volunteer to take over the project, or a group. Provide them with the source, and your candid assessment of where the flaws are and what needs to be done to rectify them (rewrite).
If you simply close down the project, you will make a lot of people unhappy with you who are currently happy with you - that would be silly. It's easy enough to make enemies without going out of your way to alienate people who will otherwise respect your decision.
Are you certain you won't gain more valuable experience/knowledge from working on this project? Why not reimplement it in the language/platform of your choice thereby making it a learning experience?
I would say that if you are going to spend more time rewriting and trying to work around your current framework then starting from scratch with a better design and plan, then it's a good time to move on.
I think it really depends on your motivation for the project though. If it's purely financial then you can do a straight cost analysis. If it was for a hobby or learning experience, you may want to move on even if it would be easier to stay with the current project.
Related
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 3 years ago.
Improve this question
You are working with someone in one project and this someone writes bad code. Not that bad to fire him ar you can`t work with it,
but
person do not follow coding conventions
code is not always covered with unit tests (and it should be)
code is sloppy and do not have comments where it should have them
person do not know design patterns well/do not know at all
put his clothes on your table just as he needs some space.
So how to tell one he need to upgrade his skills, without hurting him? I described something that is a problem. But imagine everything is just fine, except some things that really hurt the project. What to do so that you are still friends, but guy really understood he need to change something?
This is a good candidate for having the entire company do code reviews for a month. You won't single him out (which is good, unless all else fails), and you're better engineers can help him along.
Just stay professional, and point out the problems in your bug tracking, code reviews, or whatever means you have for tracking work items and bugs.
It's the responsibility of the person's manager and the project's PM to determine who is responsible, and to inform the person politely. That is their job, and if they are unable to do this, your project (and probably company) is likely not a very good one to work for.
I would recommend "failing" any code that does not meet the quality criteria. For example, if there are missing unit tests, "fail" the code so that it goes back to the developer to be rectified. This would be similar to having the code fail UAT or something, except it's more of an internal review from team leaders in the development team.
As an example, in one place I worked, I was leading a team of developers. We had PHP production code that was writing unnecessary warnings to the log files, which eventually caused disk space problems and difficulties in debugging the real bugs.
So, to rectify the problem, I laid down the rule: if any code that you've written writes warnings to the log file, the release will fail testing, and you'll need to fix it before it goes any further.
We had almost no warnings being logged on the next release. Now, it wasn't technically a bug, just a code quality issue. The point is that someone needs to be the gatekeeper that reviews and enforces quality controls at some point in the development lifecycle.
Even better, write some automated integration tests that check unit tests exist and code is styled correctly. There are some tools that can check this for you (not sure of the names of them, someone else may be able to enlighten us on that). That way, the build fails an automated, reproducible test. Code would get cleaned up quick smart if that was happening I would say.
You can implement code analysis/styling tools into your build process that enforce certain design and style guidelines. The benefit of this approach is it doesn't single anyone out and it applies to everyone.
Depending on the language your project is using, there are probably tools out there to do this for you. Ex. StyleCop and FxCop for C# projects.
Relax, just invite him for a drink go out and get stoned then explain him the whole situation. The next morning if hopefuly he can still remember, he's gonna understand. If not
this time he's gonna take off all his clothes and put them on your damned table :)
Anonymously leave some books on his desk, like "Code Complete" or "Refactoring".
Assuming you're not his lead, inform his lead of your concerns and let that individual take responsibility for the problem.
write some unit tests that covers his code. He may not know how to write good tests, so he can use yours as an example. Set up automated scripts that regularly run these tests, and send out mail detailing what failed, so that he cannot simply ignore the presence of these tests.
We had a guy at work who only bathed once a week (and no, he wasn't French). And towards the end of the week his BO got pretty bad. We left a bunch of hygiene products on his desk for him to try and give him a clue. Didn't work. I think he started going 2 weeks between baths after that. Phew. This was 20+ years ago.
Coding conventions? Like what? Where to put curly braces?
Missing/bad comments? Well, sometimes no comments are better than gratuitous or wrong ones.
Sloppy code? Maybe so. Post an example or two. Maybe he's a good coder, and you're not that bright. After all, PM's aren't usually that bright, they just know how to kiss ass better than some of us care to.
Design patterns? Bullshit bingo fodder.
But taking his clothes off and leaving them on your desk is strange. IMHO.
Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 3 years ago.
Improve this question
I've been making small scale projects for a while now. I haven't started a large project, yet, because I haven't come across anything which I needed and wasn't already accomplished by some other FOSS. Until now. I want to make a program which will allow users to interactively learn secondary languages (I'm kind of want to make it as close to Rosetta Stone as I can).
Right now I'm the only developer since I'm not sure if I'm biting of more than I can chew and don't want to waste any contributors time.
So far I've been planning how the project is going to work and setting up tools to make the project start smoothly and for it to be readily accessible for when other users are ready to contribute to it. I've set up a SourceForge account, a git repository, as well as a document which lists all the features and what the program is going to accomplish.
A basic break down is that the suite is going to be written in java, and the suite will have the ability to support many languages via their locale. The courses for learning the languages will be written in jython. Course-makers will have the ability to use pre-made jython courses to teach their course, or make their own original ones. I'm hoping this will allow for the software to teach copious languages via many mother tongues.
I'm also planning on having a repository of "released courses" which are ones which I (or people who better comprehend the language) think are top-notch courses. This will hopefully make the program seem more professional and secure to the users while allowing third party participation.
With this in mind:
Are there any fatal flaws or suggestions about my project you would like to make?
Is there anything I'm missing about making a big project in general?
Thank you for your time and effort,
Joseph Pond
You will always be biting off more than you can chew if you don't believe other people should consider your project worth their time. This is much more of a leadership point than a programming point. But seriously, work it out: is this idea something that you believe can happen even knowing that you are currently unprepared for many of the challenges that you are about to face? You've given us a rough outline. You'll be giving others a more thorough explanation, and it will soon become obvious that you've overlooked some stuff. Nobody can keep that from happening to you. Having said that, if you think that you have a good grasp of the requirements of most of the components and you believe you can thoroughly describe the requirements to others with appropriate skills, I'd say go for it.
P.S. -- If you have any mock-ups, that would make it seem like a sweet deal from a prospective developer's perspective. It sounds like the selling point is the extensibility of easily designing new courses. If that's so, give an idea of the basic structure of the Jython. When my supervisor gives me a task that I understand thoroughly, I'd rather he didn't show me how to get started or what design or implementation to use. When I have no idea what he's talking about, the roughest of sketches gives me days of a head start.
Are you also the only analyst, translator, technical writer, and tester? This sounds like a large undertaking for one person. Do you have a deadline? In my opinion you will need at least another developer and tester. Even more if you have tight deadlines.
Just find the right person who really agrees with your idea and will take the ownership.
I had been involved in several projects but I dropped out some and only worked on the one I really interested in. So, look at it in the reverse side, looking for a contributor is not easy and must find the person has the things I mentioned about. Then, you can talk about keep contact,, system... project manage..etc. If you can't find the right person, even you have a good system, you are just wasting your time and going nowhere.
Okay, a couple things. First, it's better never to do a big project. Do lots of small projects instead. If it works out that what you get at the end is a big thing, that's good.
Second, a lot of times what works best for this of thing is to think about how you can make something to make it all easier. in this case, you have two issues: making something that does the various operations needed to display and give feedback (I'm working through a Rosetta Stone course myself, they're pretty cool.)
You're really thinking about a course authoring system; you can't write all the materials for all the languages, so you have to make it easy to do the authoring.
This sounds like a job for a DSL, a domain specific language.
And it sounds like a really cool idea.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 3 years ago.
Improve this question
What steps can one take to mitigate the risk of a one-person team working on a project, especially when that one person is a rather junior programmer?
I ask because I am that junior programmer, and there is no one available/willing to do things like code reviews. Part of the problem, I suppose, is that I am working on web applications in an embedded software company, so most employees' expertise is in a different area.
Recognising this as a problem is more than most "junior programmers" would be able to do :)
Unfortunately most employers don't see the benefits (only the downsides) in multiple people on the same task.
With lack of understanding from your employer on this point, just stick to all the usual rules, such automated testing, documentation, and source control. I know too well that when working alone on a project, it is all too easy to become complacent.
The truth is that the documentation is not just to help others know what your code does. It helps you too. Source control is not just to enable multiple people to work on a project and merge changes, it helps productivity (in the sense that you can easily revert changes), enforces backups, and gives you good tracking of where your time and effort has been spent.
Source control and automated tests are two things that will help in any environment. Those two things alone will mitigate some of the major disasters (lost work, buggy code resulting from constant changes and refactoring).
Beyond that, stick to the basics: K.I.S.S. Keep your code design as simple as possible, keep your classes simple, follow the Single Responsibility Principle and above all, avoid duplication (which will greatly guide your designs). Make use of every resource you have: message boards, other programmers at other companies, friends from school, whatever you have available to you. Even having a mentor you can send e-mail to is helpful.
Best practices aren't much different than for a larger group. Source control, unit testing, follow a style guide for your language, script everything instead of using manual processes, and try to have at least some high level documentation and comments in the tricky parts of code. For specific decisions that are important and hard to change, like how your code interacts with the database, try to find out what approach a well-designed project uses, if necessary by checking on this site.
Unit tests especially are a great way for other people to quickly figure out how your code is supposed to behave, and to check whether their changes have broken anything.
StackOverflow is full of available and willing people to help solve problems and give advice.
Other than that, be prepared to make mistakes and learn from them.
Oh yeah, and get a copy of Code Complete!
As #MattJ mentioned, the fact that you care enough to try to mitigate that risk implies much more seniority than your current job title purports.
I would say that you should do all of the normal things you do to mitigate risk and, where it's not possible to get another resource, just either do it yourself, or skip that step.
It's the best you can do.
Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 5 years ago.
Improve this question
We are starting off on a new from scratch implementation of an eCommerce solution and have decided on the framework to use too. There will be people joining the project who never really had any experience working on this framework. How should we go about doing the knowledge management/transfer? What could be the other challenges we need to be prepared for and how?
I can think of starting a WIKI with the most often needed content and addressing the most common roadblocks...Is that a good idea?
A glossary will go a long way.
Make sure that you and your team use the glossary when talking. There's no point having specific words for things if you don't use them correctly.
Stand up meetings each day should help with whatever roadblocks you have.
Make sure that your team has as high bandwidth communication as possible but also allow for quiet time where people can focus. Maybe have the first 15min. of each hour as a time when people can walk up to each other and ask questions etc. Then the other 45min is silent time. Reassess this to get a balance that everyone fits with.
I second the wiki recommendation - we have had a great deal of success using it to form a knowledge base and glossary for our projects.
Another technique that has worked well for us is creating a scratch repository (e.g. SVN, Git, etc.) for the purpose of technology ramp up spikes. We're currently working on an enterprise-scale project leveraging Spring's OSGi support, and we created several spike projects to explore different facets of the technology. This helped us grasp the technology before getting too encumbered by the business needs.
As far as challenges for which to be prepared? Expect the unexpected. Any time you embark on using a new framework/technology, you will run into roadblocks and your initial velocity will suffer. My best advice - simple determination. Don't give up on your framework at the first sign of stormy weather. Work through the issues. Eventually you'll clear most of the hurdles and your velocity will increase exponentially as the entire team gets more comfortable with the technology.
I think this is the ideal situation for a wiki. Let the developers choose which wiki to use, because they're the ones that will be using it!
There is this thread:
http://discuss.joelonsoftware.com/default.asp?biz.5.738060.3
You might consider Alfresco.com's open source solution for content management.
I think the Wiki is a good idea, but there is also no substitute for real code. To that end a good quality (reference) implementation of a single function, which shows all the layers in the code stack, ie from browser/form down to the DB and back again.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
We have a project coming up where the PM is insistent that the team should "eat their own dog food"?
At what point is it realistic to do this?
e.g. assume we have to write an editor. We can't use this editor at the beginning to actually code because it doesn't exist. We have to use another editor.
For a while during the project, using a buggy editor is going to slow the project down and will be counter productive.
So at what point do we switch?
Update: After some discussion within the team, the points we will stress during development are:
Implement smallest subset possible to start off with
Identify critical features asap
Only switch some of the developers to use the new product to minimise risk
Some of you should be using it as soon as you possibly can. The first version should be stripped-down, with only the most essential features that you need in order to use it as an (in this case) editor. Once you start using it you'll find out in a hurry which features are important.
<rant>
don't produce dog food, then you don't have to eat dog food.
what is the origin of this sick and stupid phrase anyway? dogs don't produce their own food (with one vulgar exception)...
</rant>
ask the PM what is more important: using the product under development to do development, or producing quality code on time? if there's a conflict, which is more important?
the common-sense answer is: use the thing you are building when it is better than the tools you have.
You don't have to switch to using the development editor exclusively. Start using it until it impacts your production, make a list of the things that are problematic, fix them, repeat until you are able to productively use it most/all of the time.
For a while during the project, using
a buggy editor is going to slow the
project down and will be counter
productive.
Sounds like you have your answer. The time to switch is when your project isn't going to impede on productivity.
This is one of those "it depends" questions. Some guidance:
What are the risks of using the project before it's fully baked? Are they acceptable?
Will the project progress faster or slower, and is this an issue?
Will the quality of the end product improve from a business point of view?
Will you end up with features that make the programmers more productive but aren't useful to the customers?
Conversely, will critical features be deferred because the developers aren't "interested" in them?
Will the "taste of the dog food" motivate your developers?
Perhaps the most helpful guide is what I call "Headrick's Rule," after the coworker who first explained it to me:
If you need someone to accomplish something, make it painful for him not to accomplish it!
The flip side, of course, is to make it pleasurable to get the project done as quickly and as well as possible. Personally, I enjoy building and using tools, so I'd serve the dog food as quickly as prudence permits. But my coworker was a sadist and would have answered, "as soon as it compiles!"
Good luck with your project!
Depending on how the development in being done you can switch earlier or later. If you are using a TDD methodology or where finding and fixing bugs is higher on the list I would start whenever you have enough features you feel would help your day to day life. This could be really early in the development if you have prioritized your features effectively.
Otherwise I would wait until you get to some of the later stages, pre alpha or pre beta. This means that you are not feeling too much pain early in the development.
As mentioned by other, if you can change your development efforts to try to make the product usable earlier do it! I would recommend to have people start using the product in earnest as early as possible to help evaluate the various features and get your initial users emotionally attached to the product. A developer who cares will often put in that extra effort to make the project just that much better.
It's about finding what your "critical mass" of features are. If it's just a matter of bugs and not features, switch now. Fix your bugs. If you are going to need to do feature development before your tool becomes useful, finish those critical features, and then switch over.
And I sincerely hope you're not writing an editor! ;-)
I guess the correct answer is as soon as you can. Of course using a buggy version is going to slow you down at first but then you will perform the QA as you are developing so in the long run you will save time.
I'll suggest that some of your team switch and not the whole team to prevent a big hold if there's a blocker in the application.
When the dog food becomes appetizing AND as soon as possible. I guess this is another way of saying that you should deliver value early and often. And, by the way, never deliver known buggy software. Fewer features without bugs is better than more features with bugs.
its all about size, scalability and scope. If the product would provide valuable success from the "dog food" approach then ASAP would be the correct answer. The end user experience dictates the end result of using the product.
Don't start using it until it reaches an "Alpha" stage. It should have all primary features complete and no known critical bugs. Then you can start using it.
It's also important to have the target users try it out, not just developers (unless it is a developer tool).
You want to have enough development time left to fit in as many "Wouldn't it be great if it did this?" features as possible.
The question is meaningless when applied to software the development team won't use itself, so the developers should use it as soon as feasible. "Feasible" means that it will work reasonably well, and won't break things too badly.
When developing a text editor, the developers should use it early, since mistakes aren't going to be crucial. When developing a version control system, the developers should use it only once it's been shown to be sound. It was something of a big deal when the Subversion team switched away from their CVS servers.
One idea would be to have earlier and later adopters among the team, as the later adopters are likely to spot things the earlier ones have become blind to.