News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Gitlab ‘rethinking’ third-party telemetry by Kalium on Thursday October 24, 2019 @11:39AM (#21345728)
As a rule, the structures around product teams tend to discourage asking if it's better to not ship a thing. When you measure a team by what (and how many things) they ship, they are always going to default to shipping things.
Re:Gitlab ‘rethinking’ third-party telemetry by overgard on Thursday October 24, 2019 @11:47AM (#21345793)
The structure thing is spot on. Decisions like this tend to get made when management has found a way to essentially silence any feedback (by making feedback pointless). This is why I cringe whenever I hear the phrase "leadership team". Whenever I hear that phrase deployed it's almost always to diffuse responsibility for a bad decision so no single person has to answer for it. Which amusingly is the opposite of real leadership: real leaders actually accept responsibility for the decisions they make.
Re:Gitlab ‘rethinking’ third-party telemetry by hn_throwaway_99 on Thursday October 24, 2019 @06:25PM (#21349829)
This is absolutely true. It's absolutely what killed Digg with Digg V4 IMO.

I can't possibly believe anyone who ever used Digg could have taken a look at Digg V4 and thought "Oh yes, a feed full of spam, just exactly what I come to Digg for". But the team had already invested a ton of work, and organizationally it would have been next to impossible to say "Shit, we fucked up, lets hold off". So at least I give GitLab credit that they backed off (for now).

Re:Gitlab ‘rethinking’ third-party telemetry by LyndsySimon on Thursday October 24, 2019 @12:50PM (#21346411)
This is... insightful.

It brings to mind a larger question of how we (as an industry) should be measuring developer and team productivity, though. “Story points” are largely designed to solve this issue, but in my experience they are quickly co-opted to mean something different to each stakeholder.

At a past employer, I experienced their trying to measure productivity by “net lines of code”. That didn’t work well, either. I prefer refactoring and simplifying to pretty much any other type of task, and it isn’t at all uncommon for me to end a day - or a sprint - with a negative NLOC. I see at a positive, as each LOC carries with it an ongoing cognitive and maintenance burden. Thankfully, that scheme didn’t last long :)

Re:Gitlab ‘rethinking’ third-party telemetry by kevas on Thursday October 24, 2019 @11:43AM (#21345750)
This is hitting too close to home. Currently on a team that does what’s on the task list without questioning anything—driving me up the wall.
Re:Gitlab ‘rethinking’ third-party telemetry by Aeolun on Thursday October 24, 2019 @08:31PM (#21350590)
This is a function of the organization, not the team.

If you hear ‘do it anyway’ after raising concerns one too many times, eventually you just do it.

Re:Gitlab ‘rethinking’ third-party telemetry by JohnFen on Friday October 25, 2019 @12:46PM (#21356798)
Not necessarily. It depends on exactly what "it" is. I have quit jobs before because I was required to implement something that I considered an egregiously terrible idea.