i want smaller applications with fewer updates made by people who are paid more to produce less code and i'm not kidding

[miss_rodent@girlcock.club]

@eniko Same, and also not kidding. I would rather have a group of three or four well-compensated maintainers who know the codebase very well (+ newer contributors they can afford to & have time to help teach/train) releasing security and bug fixes, with, maybe *one* feature release every year or two and a clear 'it's done'/feature complete state after which it's just bug fixes and maintenence/porting.

[miss_rodent@girlcock.club]

@eniko (Early on - like in alpha, when it's not even close to feature complete, then more feature updates is fine - but if at any point it hits a "Stable" release, I want that shit to be ACTUALLY stable - which means new features come slowly, and the priority is keeping it functional and reliable.)

[daviddoes@mastodon.social]

@datarama @eniko Rwgarding "out of things where they have no save reason to be"... I would honestly love more well-made dumb appliances.

There is zero reason to ever discover my toaster is part of a botnet.

[datarama@hachyderm.io]

@daviddoes @eniko Within reasonable limits, I am willing to pay for there to *not* be an app.

[basiliskxviii@kind.social]

@eniko Quite honestly, I'd generally be happy with a piece of software that gets bugfixes and nothing else. The number of time some arbitrary update changes the UI for no reason and throws my whole workflow off...

[miss_rodent@girlcock.club]

@janxdevil @eniko The Neal Stephenson novel?

[gabboman@gabboman.xyz]

@eniko@mastodon.gamedev.place

[sgsax@mastodon.social]

@eniko I'm ready for "move slow and make sure things don't break" app development again

[badtux@mastodon.social]

@eniko But then the boss would have fewer people to manage, and be unable to justify his job. Most software changes are about employment for engineers, not necessity. Grr.

As a software engineer I want computer languages and frameworks that stay stable for decades rather than have a new release every year that obsoletes old programs and requires a rewrite. But I don't get to have that :(.

#software #softwaredevelopment

[me@social.jlamothe.net]

@badtux @eniko I've written software that was "finished" only to have to update it because an underlying library introduced a breaking change. I hate that.

[badtux@mastodon.social]

@me @eniko And every fifteen minutes there is a new Java release that fixes a thousand security holes and adds a thousand new features to bloat up the runtime. Meanwhile my "C" programs from the early 1990s still compile and run just fine.

[em0nm4stodon@infosec.exchange]

@eniko @dalias Same

[ncrazed@fd00.space]

@eniko I'm genuinely considering starting l collection of Android apps with the ethos off "The UI does! Not! Fucking! Change!"

Any feature additions are purely optional and of be default

No nag screens to promote the new stuff

[me@social.jlamothe.net]

@badtux @eniko I actually had to re-write large chunks of a program I wrote for a client because Haskell's ncurses wrapper just kind of... stopped being a thing.

Fortunately, I never liked ncurses to begin with and had abstracted much of it away. The code I'd written was fairly easy to retrofit into brick instead.

[themipper@mastodon.social]

@eniko can we also get mobile operating systems that get more optimized and less resource hungry with every update so that devices can run for 10+ years before becoming obsolete?

[timwardcam@c.im]

@eniko Product: What's this ticket for, this one you're working on, it doesn't seen to be delivering any new feature? Why are we doing it?

Devs: It lets us delete a couple of thousand lines of no-longer-used code. Which will then no longer need to be maintained, tested, documented, ect ect.

Product: Great! That's what we like to hear!