bayindirh 19 hours ago

When the product you're developing is governed by regulations and standards you need to comply, owning your craft is doing things by the book, not adding fields on your own because it might be useful later.

  • dogleash 15 hours ago

    So what? I've worked places with lots of regulation. Part of every development job is learning the product domain. In that case devs become comfortable with reading standard/law/regulations and anticipating when software implementation might interact with the areas covered.

    Sure there were people who's job was to offload as much compliance work from everyone else; by turning it into internal requirements, participating in design discussion and specializing in ensuring compliance. But trying to isolate the development team from it is just asking for micromanagers.

    • bayindirh 15 hours ago

      > So what?

      Think before you act. The machine has no brain. Use yours.

      > Part of every development job is learning the product domain.

      Yes.

      > In that case devs become comfortable with reading standard/law/regulations and anticipating when software implementation might interact with the areas covered.

      This is what I'm saying, too. A developer needs to think whether what they are doing is OK by the regulation they're flying against. They need to ask for permissions by asking themselves "wait, is this OK by the regulation I'm trying to comply?".

      > But trying to isolate the development team from it is just asking for micromanagers.

      Nope, I'm all for taking initiatives, and against micromanagement. However, I'm also against "I need no permission because I'm doing something amazing" attitude. So own your craft, "code responsibly".

      • dogleash 15 hours ago

        Oh, I thought you were disagreeing with hamandcheese's point that every little decision doesn't need to go through a product owner before anything happens.

        • bayindirh 14 hours ago

          No, not at all. by "the book", I meant regulations, not the management. :)

hombre_fatal 19 hours ago

I never worked at a place with product owners, but their post made me appreciate my roles where I'm trusted to help design the product myself. Yeesh.

Being unable to even call the shot of whether a database table should have an updated_at or soft-delete sounds like a Dilbertian hellscape to me.

IanCal 19 hours ago

Although those can be more complicated, and it should be clear what they're for and why they exist. Will this result in an object having an updated_at timestamp elsewhere in a larger application? Is it clear which properties that refers to?

kace91 a day ago

A soft delete might not be, for compliance reasons (GDPR and the like). Otherwise I agree.

danielPort9 19 hours ago

I think the tricky part lies on knowing which things can be done without consulting any product owner. I agree that created_at and updated_at don’t cause any harm. deleted_at on the other hand cannot be decided by engineers only (mainly because of GDPR reasons: if something is expected to be totally deleted, then that must be it). As usual, these kind of things are obvious to engineers with years of experience , not so much to newcomers.