Movie Reviews

slacker :P

The paragon of understanding these isseus is right here!

Is it duificflt to argue whether the benfits of shared code ownership are over-hyped since so much depends on one’s view of what is, and is not, hype. Suffice to say, I think that there are many benefits to shared code ownership.One of the key benefits of shared code ownership is that it reduces the risk of key individuals holding the company to ransom, or risk disaster when someone gets sick or leaves.Everyone on a team should, I think, feel free to inspect and, if necessary modify, the work of others. More importantly, a developer should be able to “fix” the code of others when it becomes clear that the code contains a hitherto undiscovered defect.Now, this nonsense about shared code ownership being a Pair Programming thing.What absolute tosh!Most of the work environments that I experienced over the last decade have encourgaed a high degree of code owenership. I have been involved in support side of the business as well as the development side. There is nothing quite like an irate customer for generating the motivatation to inspect the work of colleagues and fix their mistakes.It seems to me that some developers like to think they live in a Never Never Land where the consequences of their actions are so remote that then never have to grow up.In the real world, the company owns the code and you, as an employee, have every right to modify that code if it contains mistakes.Less of this nonsense of individual ownership. If anyone, other than the company, owns the code, it is the team that develops it. The team needs to get things done. Shared ownership is the way forward.An example of the opposite behaviour was the way that the first software team leader at my current employer worked. Everyone was (effectively) allocated an area of work. Everyone owned their own area. You needed to negotiate with the owner to get things changed. That may sound like “team work” to you but it sounds like “fortress development” to me.It didn’t work and slowed us down a lot. In the end, after the TL left, we were able to take a really good at some of his code. It was full of good ideas but an awful implementation. Methods had awful names; one class, in particular, had grown out of control. He resisted renaming it for fear that something would break. As soon as he left we renamed it after its purpose. Over time it has been refactored on a release-by-release basis so that we, the code owners, can understand its operation and rationale.Shared code ownership is what teams need to work well. Silo development may sound more “efficient” or “effective” but it rarely is.It is the group dynamic that matters. Shared code ownership is a way to get people to collaborate. Personal ownership does not.

LuJW4S pgucaksumcpz

hVL8Jk guwcclujqnrm