Re: WebCup 2015

From: Dhiruj Rambaran <dhiruj_at_shoponline.mu>
Date: Mon, 25 May 2015 13:19:41 +0400

I think the level and depth of (software) engineering required all
depends on what the project is all about. Is it a website for a
Tabagie?.. or a Tabagie who hopes to be bigger than Intermart one day?,
or are they Intermart themselves? Also how much is the guy willing to
pay? Rs 2000?.. Rs 10,000?.. or is the client willing to pay Rs 3000 but
with view to pay more later when they're intermart?.. or will they not
expect to pay anything even if they became an intermart one day?

It can be a tricky business measuring all these variables.

You are half right Nadim when you say a developer must think like a
businessman. Vy-Shane is also right re: bad engineering will (can) cost
more later. The fact is you need to balance BOTH and the ratio between
one and the other is based mostly all the variables I mention at the
beginning.

A (pure) developer finds it very hard to sacrifice quality. They're
geeks, purists and would rather hang themselves than spout out bad code.
In fact it's because of this there are so many arguments between the
client/business and developers/geeks. The business just wants "a
program" that does the job, does it fast and they save money somewhere
along the line.

Academically we like to stick to standards etc.. .but in real world
business, it's all about "who pays your salary"?


Just my personal opinion

Dhiruj


On 25/05/2015 12:45, Vy-Shane Sin Fat wrote:
> On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Mohammad Nadim
> <nadim.attari_at_gmail.com <mailto:nadim.attari_at_gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>
> On 25 May 2015 at 11:21, Jochen Kirstätter <mscc_at_kirstaetter.name
> <mailto:mscc_at_kirstaetter.name>> wrote:
>
>
> The whole rating process is based on *the client's / visitor's
> point of view*.
>
>
> +1 +1 +1 (many pluses) to you JoKi.
>
> I've always told my collegues, especially Nirvan, with whom I do
> some freelancing when time permits, that you should not think like
> a developer but like a businessman + understand the clients'
> requirements. We are not at school to get A+ for writing
> outstanding codes. We are here to (1) make the client happy (2)
> provide something that won't make the client lose money (3) we
> make money as a developer/"businessman." At the end of the day,
> it's all that matters. <rude>fsck standards, fsck coding
> conventions, fsck software engineering, fsck etc...</rude>
>
>
> I hope that you are being facetious.
>
> Good engineering isn't optional, period. Bad engineering will
> definitely make the client lose money once the software sinks under
> its own weight because it's too hard to make changes to it. Your
> client may not know or care, but you should know better and should
> care. Software projects are always evolving, and you can't take the
> short-sighted approach that you'll throw it over the wall at version
> 1.0 and be done with it.
Received on Mon May 25 2015 - 09:20:02 PST