On Wed, Mar 20, 2019, 3:32 PM Nick Wilson (Quiddity) <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Pine,
> please see the exact (quite precise) definition of
> https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/technical_debt
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technical_debt
> https://martinfowler.com/bliki/TechnicalDebt.html
> I.e. Technical debt is Not at all equivalent to "bugs". The topic is a
> tangential one. Software can work perfectly fine for end-users even if it
> has a lot of "technical debt", it is just a pain for developers to change
> anything in it or connected to it because the code has complex issues (it's
> a mess, or imperfectly architected at a higher-level, or "icky", or other
> factors). It is not possible to measure, and is somewhat subjective in
> nature.
>

Thanks for correcting me regarding the definition. That helps. (One of
these days I will probably write something that will reveal a deep
ignorance of a Wikimedia topic, and I'm sure that I will hear about it.
Making errors is one way to learn, although it is a way that I often make
an effort to avoid.)


> Overall this thread is going in circles, and I recommend dropping it here.
> There are several good suggestions above if anyone wants to put effort into
> actual solutions.
>

It sounds like we have different perspectives. However, get the impression
that people are getting tired of the this topic, so I'll move on.


Pine
( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Reply via email to