Matches my own experience when working on software where quality matters, like large and long-running scientific projects: Even if there are tight time constraints, you won’t sacrifice quality, because that would make you slower.
Matches my own experience when working on software where quality matters, like large and long-running scientific projects: Even if there are tight time constraints, you won’t sacrifice quality, because that would make you slower.
I don’t really understand what you are trying to say. Can you explain?
I agree that the things they are saying are non-optional aren’t, and that teams can get to large, resource allocations so large they become a hindrace, etc … but calling being intentional about such things “cheap” just invites Elon-stans and their ilk to give their teams, suppliers, and vendors shit over not magically pulling off the unicorn-trifecta,; Without (paid)overtime, no-less.
Do NOT let people redifine the necessities and trade-offs of price(raw materials, equipment, comforts, safety), pay, team-size, or (excessive)managerial/administrative overhead. In the end, they will have you feeling like you owe them for the opportunity to do the work of five people for peanuts.
If you care to check my comment history, I recently got-into-it for trying to redefine “en-shitification” to include things like tech-debt and planned-obselescence. Really, what irks me is that the one has all-but shut-down conversations about the other two. “That’s just enshittification” or “that’s not enshittification” will get trotted-out whenever needed to bring the conversation away from them, or keep it from moving towards the two, because no-one gets promoted by mentioning any of the three, but enshittification is almost-acceptable water-cooler talk, for the moment, with the bonus that it shames the speaker for cussing.