Re:Ask HN: How do I spend less time updating “business logic”?
by mh44 on Monday February 01, 2021 @03:04PM
(#25993025)
Thanks for sharing your story. Oh man, that sucks! Yeah, it's funny there's things I don't want to build in the first place. And then the moment you build them, you are responsible for making sure they work for the rest of your tenure. Managing downstream dependencies is genuinely hard for so many systems, and is made worse by the lack of visibility and custom code-writing for internal tools.
Re:Ask HN: How do I spend less time updating “business logic”?
by giantg2 on Monday February 01, 2021 @06:51PM
(#25995765)
I actually would love to own a system. I've done that as an acting tech lead for a year, and then as an ASC for a large application from a security perspective. It seems that the issues in this system are different. I probably should have said no to building it until the other systems fixed their architectures (comingled business and tech data, really?). I don't know. I need a job so I should just keep my mouth shut. I wish I could be the one making those bigger decisions and making lots of money while sucking.
Overall, it depends on the system if it saves time/effort or not. If the changes are infrequent and basic, you might as well just have them send an email and plug it into an SQL template that you saved from the last request. If it's repetitive and frequent, then I think it makes sense to build a simple UI and let them deal with it.
It could also depend on what you like. You mention wanting to build system over changing business logic. So maybe you would like building the system for them to make thier own changes vs making updates yourself.
I do feel you om the business logic stuff. I'm currently dealing with a problem because of the business requests. They commingled business display content and system data in one field, then the other team decided they would change that field content per the business request without consulting with downstream systems. Not to mention they aren't properly following json format so we have to do some escaping/parsing before running the message through a real parser... it's so frustrating. And of course the pressure is on me to fix it, and my suggestion to roll back that change the broke multiple systems was a no-go. Apparently form is more important than function.