I think it was doomed to fail as soon as people argued that an organization
with an ~$80m annual budget had too many "resource constraints" to address
a backlog of bugs in its core product. That happened in the first five or
so replies to the thread!
On Sun, Mar 24, 2019 at 10:05 PM John Erling Blad <jeblad(a)gmail.com> wrote:
It is a strange discussion, especially as it is now
about how some
technical debts are not _real_ technical debts. You have some code,
and you change that code, and breakage emerge both now and for future
projects. That creates a technical debt. Some of it has a more
pronounced short time effect (user observed bugs), and some of has a
more long term effect (it blocks progress). At some point you must fix
all of them.
On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 11:10 PM Pine W <wiki.pine(a)gmail.com> wrote:
It sounds like we have different perspectives.
However, get the
impression
that people are getting tired of the this topic,
so I'll move on.
I don't think this will be solved, so "move on" seems like an obvious
choice.
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l