For me, it was probably starting holding regular tech book review sessions.
Over time the discussion around both architecture and implementation details got way more structured, quicker and more satisfying to all parties. Seems obvious, but building up mental model of software development through a structured approach is better than just letting it happen naturally during work hours.
I work in the public sector in India. Usually forms here are phrased in threatening terms - you can submit any document only once, and there is a threat of perjury for just uploading the wrong document etc. I proposed that we can utilise cheap cloud storage so that users can submit documents as many times as they want, and as long as any of the uploaded documents are correct, then it will be accepted.
This reduced the phone calls our office received by about 80 percent.
I hope the Indian govt sets up something similar to that design/tech agency set up by US/UK govts.
In the meantime, a lot of props to you for designing interfaces that empathize with users. That's the kind of thoughtfullness we need!
No, they're saying call volume went down by 80%. We know nothing about how many callers generated the calls before and after. Maybe each and every customer used to call them 5 times per month, and now each customer calls them only once per month. That would be an 80% reduction in calls, but a 0% reduction in # customers who feel the need to call.
I rewrote the Firefox Shutdown so that it actually worked.
I also introduced structured async programming, async testing, async exception reporting in our codebase.
And yes, I do enjoy bragging :)
Every so often, after a system restart due to running out of battery on my laptop, I'd start Firefox and get the dreaded "only one window, home tab".
I was able to recover by going through backups, but it was a fiddly and manual process, and for a while last summer it happened annoyingly often. There were a couple of times I couldn't recover what I'd been working on the previous day.
I'd sugges you need to find an alternative workflow... even one thousand tabs has far passed the point of diminished returns
The other one is that getting file safety correctly is really hard. The OS likes to the developer, the filesystem lies to the OS and the hardware lies to everyone. For most applications, that's not a big deal, but for something that used to run every 15 seconds on hundreds of millions of computers, this can cause data loss. That's why you really want to use a DBMS rather than roll your own format if data safety is critical.
For shutdown, it was also a case of initial architecture not matching the current situation anymore. Firefox was initially a synchronous, single-threaded, single-process architecture, but this had stopped being the case for a few years already. At some point, shutdown needed to be re-architectured, I happened to be the one who managed to convince people that the time was now :)
For example, when a Garmin watch runs out of battery during workout (or if a software crashes), the workout always gets saved, and you can resume it when you turn the watch back on.
There will be a pause in the conversation and (as if its my meeting) I'll say something like generic "Jim what do you think?" No matter what he says I acknowledge it and thank him.
A few things happen. 1. It removes the internal conflict Jim was having if he should speak up or not. 2. It gives him 'the floor' so he knows for a minute he will be heard. Others are probably wondering why I called on him and want to hear what he has to say. 3. His answer might not be directly related, however it often sets off a chain of conversation that often does lead to creative answers.
People actually do like to contribute. The way I look at it is we're not leaving this room until I feel like we have at least heard every idea good or bad. Those set of ideas are our collective intelligence at that moment and I fully intend on leveraging it.
24:00
As an introvert in a team of very talkative and opinionated people it is often hard to speak up. Having other people creating space for me to speak has been very helpful.
Unfortunately, I find very long BTD loops to be personally offensive though, to the point it makes me emotional, which harms my ability to make my case. Despite knowing this, it's almost impossible to stop it from coloring my arguments. I fear that I have such a large amount of contempt for those who don't share my view on this that it leaks out whatever I do. I even know, intellectually, that this is wrong - ignorance does not deserve contempt, but compassion, after all. But my traitor heart doesn't want to listen. :(
I don't know how true / substantial this effect is, obviously. Nonetheless, seems like good self awareness shown in this comment. That's more than a lot of people can say
Alternatively, I'd like to work for an organization that's on the same page here. Effectiveness in software (or anything that depends on iterating on a design) relies more on a fast loop than anything; I'm tired of fighting this battle.
It can be annoying, but at the same time, it forces them to take a break to think about things they're currently working on. When you have nothing to think about and your current work is simple and you're waiting minutes, you tend to get bored and frustrated though.
And also remember that some people would simply rather get paid to do nothing, and a long BTD cycle helps that.
Encountering these in my very first programming job made me learn make(1).
The thing is, I'm not very bright and my work "style" involves a fair share of trial and error. Obviously, all this waiting prevented me from doing my thing, so I eventually rewrote the whole build system just so I can do more trial-and-error.
I've always considered my dependency on a fast BTD loop a weakness, though. I guess the majority of developers can just imagine what the code does in their head and only make the changes when they know what they're doing.
You should try writing software for SP routers :)
When was this, and how does it look now?
Having come off of a project that supported 400k registered and 100k active users on a single server, this project isn't yet at that scale and they were anticipating massive scale issues. This mistake was a real bonanza for an engineering team wanting to learn the latest tech; a massive failure for the product that really needs fast UX iterations to succeed.
If you want to talk more about it, you can email me.
And yet some organizations want to run all the linters, all the tests, for all the languages, orchestrated by Jenkins on a huge Amazon cluster. This is bad.
[1] This is very cool - an Apple IIe emulator running Logo in the browser. https://www.scullinsteel.com/apple2/#logo
[2] Inventing on Principle has improving the BTD loop at its core https://vimeo.com/36579366
Maybe a different way to look at it is: if you could shorten the BTD loop to a minute or two, why _wouldn't_ you want that?
The ole eyebrow started twitching when I read this. I once had a 6 month contract with a RoR shop where they had such bad performance issues they started developing in production mode so it wouldn't reload everything constantly. This allowed you to make some changes quickly, but 90% of everything required you to restart the web server and it literally took minutes for it to load everything. They had close to 200 rubygems, and I've always guessed that was the core of the issue.
When I suggested we need to fix that issue, the senior did-an-internship-here-last-summer developer got extremely passive aggressive with me (I didn't renew that contract). This guy thought he was amazing, I remember him arguing with me about a bug where they were storing decimal numbers as float in MySQL. I seriously had a 30 minute long conversation where he told me repeatedly I was wrong until I finally got exasperated, made the changes, and it fixed the bug. The guy was couldn't believe it fixed the issue and spent another couple of hours looking for why I was wrong.
I've never touched RoR again, that experience was horrific.
Sometimes you can't help the slowness, but I know I seriously dislike header-only libraries in C++ specifically because of their effect on the BTD loop. I have no idea how people can tolerate working like that, it's a slow hell for me.
So there were 2 kinds of big categories of things that happened. One was that we really slashed the amount of time from first master branch build to deployment. If things went well we could release to production in under an hour. This radically changed everything about our process. We started building smaller stuff because we could try things out in production very quickly. Code review times dropped a lot because we had smaller units of code. Planning meetings went faster because we were talking about smaller things so discussions didn’t go sideways. The team seemed to really like it.
Second class of thing that happened was that people from other teams would drop by our slack channel and see us rolling out code by talking/clicking to a bot, and they’d want to know more. And then we’d show the speed improvements and how it integrated into the rest of the prod architecture so that you could make the migration to using it too. So it kinda organically became the defacto release architecture at the company over time.
I’m a little bummed out now because it was super fun to see this all go down, it was almost accidentally the most far-reaching change I’ve instigated at work and the impact was great.
https://www.amazon.com/Unicorn-Project-Developers-Disruption...
The gist of it is that reducing your time-to-production is one of the best investments you can make. It changes everything about how you build things.
[EDIT] to be clear, quick painful dangerous releases are no better, and (pretty much necessarily) come with the same pain in onboarding, jumping between repos/projects, undocumented "oh sometimes you have to re-install that to get it going" works-on-my-machine bullshit, getting a good feedback loop going, et c.
Most people either write no docs or they write a doc that assumes the reader already knows what the thing is.
I write docs that assume you're a new employee and explain the thing in simple, plain English before building up the technical details.
Notably, these kind of docs make it easy to handoff maintenance and further development to someone else so you can move on to new projects.
Realizing that my career is my own, and that I owe nothing to anybody. Nobody is doing _you_ a favor by hiring you. At most, it's a calculated risk.
Furthermore, realizing that I shouldn't suffer for management decisions. If you've been putting out fires for a whole year, either the whole team has been consistently doing a very poor job (unlikely, though possible), or the fault is out of your reach (quite likely IMO). In either case, it's totally acceptable to jump the ship to another team.
A company only keeps you around if they can justify getting more value from you than what they are paying to keep you around. Add more value and document that value you're creating for job security.
I just decided to write a simple VT-100 terminal emulator for the PC in assembler as a rogue project. It worked out so well Data I/O included it with every LogicPak for many years, as then the customer had everything they needed in the box, and Data I/O didn't have to support emulators they had no control over.
When something needs doing, I just get it done. If you wait for everyone to agree that it needs planning to be done at some point in the future, it'll never get done because the feature firehose never relents.
This has cost me a few weekends, but a) it meant that I kept my sanity in the long run and b) despite said fixes reducing the company's dependency on me (ie. supposedly damaged the job security) taking the initiative has allowed me to demonstrate a different and entirely more significant kind of value.
I would say this comment section should be renamed "Don't make a big impact at work without clearly getting the credit for the value added"
Before you do any more impactful things at work to benefit someone else's equity, do the following
- set up an internal blog location where you can write up, each friday, what you and your team have achieved
- add simple videos of good stuff in action (screen casting is easy now and always stick your voice track on top)
- tell people, with links.
Stake your claim.
And the performance win was extremely nice :-)
But the paper actually describes a significantly more sophisticated heuristic. My initial implementation simply used the number of perf samples divided by the size of the function, which helps make sure you’re getting the most out of your I-TLB. It worked shockingly well for its simplicity.
The first was to root out a customer-blaming culture that had festered for far too long in the company. I recognized how toxic it was, and how bad it was for customer service, when I arrived. Not long after that I became a supervisor and my manager (also a new hire) and I agreed it was really bad. I worked at my end and he worked at his end, helping those who would change to change, and giving those who wouldn't the opportunity to find new work. It wasn't easy. Part of it was for me to write a couple of hours of customer service training material and deliver it to all new hires. That led to me becoming the company's trainer, and I get to weave it all together in a 2 week orientation and training for all new hires.
The second thing I've done is create documentation where it didn't exist and have cleaned up documentation that was messy. I took 25-30 disparate articles on one subject, weeded out the stuff that was irrelevant or deprecated, put it all into two clear documents, and called it a run book. It went over really well and helped the department who depended on it.
Lastly, I've also had the opportunity to write new tools for front line support staff and rewrite old ones, and create documentation and training regarding their use.
In the end, I write and talk for a living, all to the end of making it easier to provide great customer service in our sector (web hosting). I love it.
Any learnings you could share on success factors / features in the new internal tools?
I can’t take full credit but we also switched to doing 6 week project cycles[0] and pitches inspired by Basecamp.
[0] https://3.basecamp-help.com/article/35-the-six-week-cycle
- respect of my opinion
- peace (as opposed to stress)
- Massive code quality increase
- Meet my deadline more often
and probably more... this was life changing
Once I told them this and showed them some graphs etc they did an experiment to set it to only cache on the 2nd hit, and this reduced the write rate on the disks massively - potentially increasing their lifespan quite significantly (saving money)
They did the hardwork of engineering it, experimenting etc but I'm proud that my little contribution helped drive a real change in a domain outside my team :)
How did you do these so people actually participated? My company is very deadline driven so people don’t really care about learning. Every attempt at regular learning meetings quickly died because people feel they don’t have time. Do you have a specific format?
I have led regular meetings about coding style in another company. These went pretty well but in the current company I have failed at instilling curiosity for learning things for its own sake
I had to convince both sides: 1. the management so that they would give us explicit permission to take time from our "actual work" time 2. the devs to actually start and keep it going
management caved in after... - I researched our competitors and their tech, highlighted features which would be very hard/impossible to implement given our architecture and what we needed to learn - dozens of comments about what we lose implementing feature Y in the "old" and "known" way vs using tech/service X - made comparisons to different professions which always have to stay on top of their game to win
all while repeating the message that we cannot have a world-class product without a world-class tech team. I think framing this as a "loss" instead of "gain" helped a ton.
With management buy-in, we were creating a "learning" card for everyone in the tech team each sprint. These cards were "committed" so there was no getting around of finishing them.
The dev team needed some motivation as well. Coding features as quickly as possible has obvious and visible advantage - you get praised, you might get a bonus, you might be promoted. Learning on the other hand.. less so.
To keep a long story short, I convinced them that the more they know the better their market value is by showing various stats. After the initial nudge, it was just intellectual curiosity that kept the meetings going.
Format wasn't anything special: - pick a book/article/system by vote - one person spends a couple of hours going through the chosen 'thing' - prepares a list of items to talk about - people vote about what should we talk about (before the meeting) - we have a presentation/discussion. each meeting ends with - list of practises/ideas we would like to implement. the list is committed to our documentation repository and followed up on - list of things we would like to learn in the future
“What are you doing?” you ask.
“Can’t you see?” comes the impatient reply. “I’m sawing down this tree.”
“You look exhausted!” you exclaim. “How long have you been at it?”
“Over five hours,” he returns, “and I’m beat! This is hard work.”
“Well, why don’t you take a break for a few minutes and sharpen that saw?” you inquire. “I’m sure it would go a lot faster.”
“I don’t have time to sharpen the saw,” the man says emphatically. “I’m too busy sawing!”
-- The 7th habit of "The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People."
- I was the one-person support for a while, and created our support process, user guides, etc. Any way that I could automate the process to speed up response time and free myself up to do other small tidbits of work, I tried.
- I was the one-person QA team, and documented known corner cases, golden paths, feature-specific regression testing guides, etc. When another employee began helping with QA, it made it much easier to onboard them to the process. We’ve since hired someone to build test automation programs and they’re referencing the same guides that are years-old now to guide their automated tests. I thought that was pretty cool.
Initiatives: More and more initiatives and idea discussion - because of this everyone started thinking everyday to build innovation and became adaptable to take risk.
1. I embraced that Perfection is a mortal enemy of It Works. Our customers pay us for it to work now, not be perfect at some point in future.
This allowed us to save millions of dollars a month and made us a viable going concern.
2. "Mongodb is Webscale" - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2F-DItXtZs
We aren't Google. We don't have Google-level global problems that we need to solve. Anything below Google level can be solved using boring technologies that just work.
This allowed us to significantly and rapidly improve customer experience.
Making sure that upcoming new features and achievements are showcased to the whole company through weekly demos.
Now each team has their own dashboard. E.g support team shows a graph of open/assigned/outstanding tickets, with SLA breaches highlighted. Sales team shows a sum up of data anomalies in their CRM (missing data, inconsistent states).
The rationale is that anything that shows up in red needs immediate action from a human being to avoid blocking the team, and we strive for the right balance between always green and always red (which are both useless states).
Currently, I'm having more fun building software tools that are actually useful to people. Who knows, maybe a few years down the road I'll get bored by this, and dedicate my time to other activities ;)
Then I realized how my other teammates also have bad loans. Planning to sell my RSUs when I get them and give out interest free loans to my coworkers.
I don’t see any other way to make an impact at work because we are building privacy invading products and I think my best efforts at work actually brings negative impact to society. Hopefully if my coworkers are no longer held down by financial woes they’ll be able to stand up for what is right and I won’t feel so alone.
I wrote a software firewall to prevent the exploitation of these insecure websites as well as a monitoring system to identify any websites that got compromised in other ways.
It moved us from spending 80% of our time recovering endlessly defaced websites to 5%, pushed us on to newer and bigger projects, and made several hackers and at least one pen tester actively curse the systems in their exploit code.
Whenever I had a task that recurred more than once, the second reoccurrence was when I implemented automation of that task. Didn't matter what it was or how much time it actually saved. The purpose was to have documented, reproducible results on any task I do. I often switched roles and then a year or two later I suddenly had to perform an old task I was "really efficient at." With automation i was able to do the task right away with almost no need to jog my memory.
Documentation requires you to get in the habit of writing. Doesn't have to be good, doesn't have to be smart and color coded. You just have to do it. I have vimwiki setup to a git repo and every discussion, every meeting, every project or note I took ends up here. Searching is easy enough and I don't have to worry about losing anything.
The last one deals with people so it requires tact. Whenever I'm asked to do a job that is a one off of something else or has additional work attached to it, I ask what the justification for the added engineering time would be. The point is to make me available for as much development as possible so if I'm stuck doing things that aren't actually needed it wastes resources. It also reduces complexity as there are minimal special cases for things.
1/ carefully rearranging headers in a large C++ product, cutting build time from hours to 30 minutes. Think levelization a la Viega (see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QjFpKJ8Xx78).
2/ setting up JSP->java->class compilation to detect syntax errors at build time rather than at web server startup, eliminated finding such errors in the field completely.
2. Set aside 30-60 minutes a day for learning, however you define it - for me it's PluralSight and Anki - that is usually how I start my day. Having it on the calendar, without many options to choose from makes it very efficient. Learning should be in sprints.
3. Set aside some amount of money every month for tools and capital purchases - targeted savings accounts are perfect for this - having the money in an account targeted for this purpose instead of a general account prevents a lot of money anxiety and allows you to do a better cost-benefit analysis.
Looking back at my previous gig, the biggest mistake we consistently made (but were somehow impotent to correct), was assuming that all of the “we should”’s which came out of post-mortems or brainstorming sessions would somehow get done. In reality, if it doesn’t become a ticket, it won’t get done.
Here’s the rub: in many orgs, there is simply too much resistance to getting engineering-centric tickets injected into a product-owned ticket pipeline. They are either outright rejected, or deprioritized to the point of being a “soft no”.
If you are in this situation, my advice is to take a risk and simply stop asking for permission to do the self-development and engineering-centric tasks which you think are important. Set aside regular time for yourself (without asking for it), track your own private backlog, and just do it.
This was the biggest change in my ability to deliver impact: realizing that I wouldn’t be given permission to get these things accomplished, and would have to bear the risk myself and just do it.
Worst-case scenario, this won’t be tolerated and you’ll be fired. Good.
Finally feels like we're actually getting somewhere!
I actively try to stay away from this for this reason. I understand that these ticketing systems are used for coordination and communication, but there's a downside to going all in on them.
My vision driving what has been a many-month push to get our teams together is to build a much higher degree of trust, respect, and collaboration between the teams of engineers, to enable our program team (consisting of both the client's team and our agency's team) to more nimbly plan and triage issues together, and to mitigate email grenades that unnecessarily pull in business stakeholders who, without context, see only bits and pieces and (understandably) fear the worst.
The combining of the teams is obviously still early in the experiment and there's a lot of history we are going to need to overcome together, but I'm optimistic this will be one of the simplest but most effective strategic moves I'll have made in my career up to this point. I'm excited about the future (challenges and all) for the team and will be doing everything in my power to make sure everyone is supported and building the trust necessary in any high-performance team.
Decided to block the calendar. Everyday from 12:30-4:30 pm my calendar is blocked and slacked is muted. If anyone had emergency, they are able to call me. Haven’t received a single call in 5 months. Wrote tons of code and spending time learning
I think as a manager it’s often the small things that can have the biggest impact. At my current company I helped revive a meeting we have called Code Read. It’s basically a meeting where the engineers sit down and go over the commits from the last couple of days focusing on ones that implement something novel or are a good learning opportunity for other devs. Sometimes it’s as simple as “what’s DRY” or “what’s a decorator” and other times it’s a deeper discussion like the performance impact of switching to immutable data structures.
It’s been especially impactful because I also pushed for us to hire some junior engineers and it’s been a wonderful way for them to get exposed to a lot of great lessons and feedback outside of the PRs they already have. Since then, those engineers have all come into their own and some of them are becoming heavy hitters.
How long do they last: 30 minutes on Tuesdays and Thursday
How many people: 4 when we started, up to like 10-12 now. I think the right size is like 6-8 maybe. We're approaching critical mass where we either need to add a lot of process or splinter it into separate groups with a good ratio of experienced to less-experienced people.
General musings: We have a separate one for the frontend and the backend each. We started with the frontend one and that's the one I've run and iterated on the process of. The basic structure is just go over the commits from the past 2 days (since we do it Tues/Thurs). You have to rely on the person running the meeting to 1) know what's important to spend extra time on and 2) keep the meeting rolling along through the meaty, important commits. This requires a decent amount of knowledge in the domain area as well as some good sense of the pulse for what's being worked on across different teams so they know when to surface things that would be important for cross-communication. That and even having a sense for good mentoring opportunities (e.g. people keep having trouble with `async/await` so I'll call out this commit with really good examples of using that feature).
So, all and all, the person leading it is one of the most important things. Having a good culture that's open to healthy constructive feedback is super helpful and allows you to dive into some conversations ripe with growth opportunities. It's one of my favorite things we do at our company!
What we've talked about is basically if it continues to grow we'll need to be a lot more structured or have to splinter off into groups with a good ratio of experienced to less-experienced engineers to still maintain learning.
(It later turned out that way before I joined, some other people also called the big problem out, but were overruled by someone high up, and after that everyone kind of forgotten that there was a problem in the first place.)
2) At my last job, I wrote a tracing profiler for Common Lisp - or rather, a quick and crude pile of hacks resembling a tracing profiler, now available here: https://github.com/TeMPOraL/tracer. Up until then, we had a sense that our performance problems came from the database, but having a hard time pinning them down with regular profiling, we blamed them on the database driver (that we've written ourselves). When we started using the tracing profiler, we quickly discovered that the driver itself was perfectly fine - it's the amount, shape and structure of the queries we're doing that caused our performance to suffer death by a thousand cuts. That couple hours of detour into writing the profiler paid for itself in the following week with an order-of-magnitude performance increase, and the insights gained shaped the further refactoring and redesigning efforts.
(Some more details about the profiler here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Common_Lisp/comments/et0fx1/tempora.... I was supposed to blog about it, but couldn't find the time this week.)
There are too many aspiring managers out there that just don't have anything subtantial to say.
Multiple usages:
Enter one keyword, and look it up in Wiki, Redmine, two extra ticket systems, mails with customers with fewer clicks.
Or enter a customername, and find him in any if these systems using other search forms.
Also offering short links to often used functions, like selfhosted password generator etc.
Saved me lots of clicks and copy and paste when debugging or investigating issues. The company had >1000 customers, product was an ecommerce software based on php/mysql
Received a small bonus when the bosses found out. I do not know if my former collegues still use it, I left the company.
I had to re-run models and tables, the faulty code was an important variable-builder for my multivariate logistic regression models, so I needed it to be 100% accurate.
It has had an incredible impact on usability of the warehouse from the business's point of view. Also a really interesting take on what business friendly documentation looks like.
Because the test was specially designed to weed out people that didn't know how computers/compilers worked, it was surprisingly effective at removing 90% of candidates. The people that got in were of the highest quality.
For example, speed up the build might make people more productive, but in a way that's not obvious to management, or even to the people working on it. It might be seen as a nice thing, but relatively minor. The knock on effects -- releasing more often, which leads to being able to try more experiments in production -- might not be noticed.
We build consumer electronics, and typically, early on in the process, we find some sort of bug with our power supply designs that generally requires a bunch of people surrender their power supply PCBs to the designer. I didn't do a damn thing to fix the power supplies, but I did manage to find [these great connectors](https://www.adafruit.com/product/368?gclid=Cj0KCQiA4NTxBRDxA...) on Adafruit that people can use to power their systems using any barrel jack wall wart supply. All you gotta do is solder some wires and choose a wall wart with the right voltage/power rating.
Sure, it's not a to-spec power supply, and it typically can't play audio at max volume, but that's irrelevant - most of the new functionality that needs to be implemented has to be implemented in software, by software developers who just need access to the tiny computer in our products. Not a high power application - at least, not much more than your average router. (Which, incidentally, almost all have wall wart supplies.)
Plus, since they're barrel jacks, they're easy as hell to unplug if you need to get a hardware rework done.
Saved us a ton of time designing stupid, bespoke, one-off AC/DC supply harnesses to suspend line voltage electronics. Just get yourself a nice safe wall wart and go. Plus, I love that I'm helping funnel a bunch of bigco bucks to Adafruit, who's a company I love to support.
I hired someone who is super detail focused and he's been amazing. He keeps meeting notes, tracks conversations, random suggestions and for funzies fixes my messy code.
I'd say this has had a huge impact on my own work, not necessarily for the larger team.
Ironically, it's a tool I wrote and maintain by sheer selfishness (I grew sick of Mercurial), on my spare time.
I migrated my division from Word docs on shared drives to Atlassian Confluence Wikis, which made knowledge more discoverable amd accessible.
For a work group, I set up a CKAN data catalogue. Soon after, our division adopted it, and after demonstrating it at a GovHack hackathon, I got seconded to our sister agency to build the first production version of https://data.wa.gov.au.
For a statewide turtle monitoring program, I switched out paper-based data capture with electronic data capture using OpenDataKit. We now have real-time data analysis and reporting. Many colleagues have found a similar need for electronic data capture. Claim to fame: wrote an R package `ruODK` to facilitate data access from ODK to R.
* reduced build times. Boss was angry at me spending time on it and it did take a while but after we started shipping weekly instead of quarterly...
* ignore my boss anytime he gets annoyed I automated legacy things. It bit me in the ass once, but paid out 10x several times.
* internal tools and automation scripts
I think a lot of the tensions that often exists between people from different backgrounds, especially when deadlines and budgets are tight, is lack of understanding what the other person is doing, what their job is.
So I started doing little talks and workshops around topics like, web applications, databases, what the different components of the system are and how they interact with each other, different types of "bugs", computational complexity, etc.
While, most of these weren't directly applicable to those peoples daily work, it helped them understand a bit better why for example task A takes much longer than B, although from a laypersons perspective they look the same. Also people appreciate learning new things when broken down to the appropriate level and removal of jargon.
Similarly I let interested tech people learn about things such as UX, product development, marketing, finance, legal, etc.
That is, when I'd find an issue that needed fixing or monitoring, the dev's on different teams would argue about the contract. "Well it's their fault because they change the webservice, so they should have tests." Etc. The hot potato would be passed and nothing would get done by any team.
I was like, screw that, I just want it to work. So as much as I could, I'd set up monitoring tools and tests to make sure our stuff worked, rather than waiting for it to break and doing a long song and dance about how it "isn't our responsibility."
Users loved my work and I became known as the go-to person if you actually needed a problem solved, rather than argued over.
While working there I noticed that other people did productivity hacks I didn't know, and vice versa, all the time, so I created the mailing list. Others had created tip lists before, but they had just posted their own tips on it, and their list fizzled after a few months.
My list had impact because it wasn't "my list" - I just set up a discussion list and a template, and send in the first forty tips or so. After that, it was essentially all other people's tips. My manager had a game-changing suggestion, too: give phonetool icons for people who submit to the list. It served as both motivation and advertising.
> My manager had a game-changing suggestion, too: give phonetool icons for people who submit to the list
What’s a phonetool icon?
Yes, it bothers me to no end seeing code that has been developed using 20 different mental models. I like the idea that enterprises (seemingly) are trying to scale by providing tools to individuals rather than trying to build up hierarchical structure within teams, but in my experience this has caused a radical redirection to having almost no cohesiveness in how code is constructed. "We use Spring Boot" is not a magic bullet.
https://medium.com/@nikitavoloboev/karabiner-god-mode-7407a5...
Start with defining the swagger.json Then generate:
- frontend-typings
- frontend request services
- backend routes and DTOs
- database fields
- use angular-jsonform for forms
- use the swagger for frontend validation
- use the swagger for backend validation
- use the swagger to discuss api changes with the client
This saves half of developing time and prevents 90% of your bugs
That’s how I want to setup the CI/CD pipeline for my new startup boomadmin. Creating a PR automatically creates the docker images and frontend assets to serve a staging env per commit.
Pushing to master deploys the images to prod.
Unexpected downstream effect, this had a big enough impact that other groups started creating checklists for other kinds of scenarios.
Strung together Segment, Zapier, customer.io to make it possible.
It’s ridiculously useful, and also gave others ideas for other types of feeds we can have for smaller teams.
The library itself was built with a lower-level part that covered every single feature, and a higher-level part that covered the most common use-cases, including enough to build a nice demo app with it.
More recently, I worked on improving/refactoring the bundle (link aggregation) implementation for the upcoming Cisco 8000 router.
It's only been online for a few weeks but it's already been quite helpful.
Developed and upheld a process for writing requirement documents for software development with my team mate.
Started to do scrum master'ish role.
Wrote a tool to manage our (really custom) development environment.
https://github.com/potomak/screencapture (not mine)
Know your tools. Know your environment.
Automation
- I invested a lot of time into speeding up our customer-oriented websites after I noticed we were regularly loading in 4-10 seconds. It wasn't seen as a major priority - however, past a certain load time for each page, you start losing users. We started off way past that certain load time and managed to end up at something between 1 and 3-second loads in most cases.
- This wasn't my idea, but a marketing manager I respect a lot once mentioned that people were spending a huge amount of time filling their date of birth while signing up. Something like 30 seconds or more. The reason was that we had been using a date picker that defaulted to the current year, so people would have to click back i.e. 30 times to select their year of birth. On his request, I replaced it with 3 lined-up fields of selects, and the time spent on average went down to 2 seconds.
- I had the chance to do a major rewrite of some legacy systems that worked fine, but weren't built to scale and lacked standardization - the company had a few hundred users in one country when they were made, and when I worked on it there was a locally-modified copy of the system for each country we were in.
The reason for it was that some of our integrations would cease to work due to third parties, and we had to implement a major upgrade, so I built a service to handle requests and standardized the old servers to only make requests to the service without being smart about how they're processed.
In the process, since everything was liable to break anyway if I didn't get it right, I updated every dependency (whether it was for the code or the server) that I could find. Not fixing what wasn't broken was a value that had served us up to that point, but we were racking on technical debt and it was a good chance to get rid of it. Sure, lots of things -did- break, but solutions were found. Technically, it'll help both me and future devs entering the project, and practically, since the integration chiefly targeted contract processing for our customers, the fact that we can still do contracts and nothing broke on the surface is a success.
- I implemented log aggregation across all our servers (using ELK) and it's been helping us track errors and server states a lot. We could have used something like Sentry, but we have millions of events going through on a regular basis, so it's cost-effective.
- We use an internal time tracker that works based on office card access events. I was always curious about racked up overtime, so I added in a calculation for it in the API and returned it in the response when loading a user's info without adding it to the frontend. I mostly used it for myself and told a few colleagues about where to look if they wanted to check. A few months later, overtime calculation was added into the tracker as a feature.
Therefore most feature code should be shipped to master with feature flags.
In general I don't like this approach. Branches are troublesome when you hire mediocre developers who don't communicate and coordinate between each other. Merge conflicts are often a result of laziness, poor architecture and planning, and weak communication skills. In my experience, smart developers do not create problems with feature branches.