They manifest as code typed by a developer, but they represent a whole lot more.
-
-
Replying to @sarahmei
People like to "own" things, but we don't talk about the other side of ownership: responsibility.
1 reply 1 retweet 27 likes -
Replying to @sarahmei
Individual code ownership implies individual code responsibility.
1 reply 2 retweets 18 likes -
Replying to @sarahmei
Meaning, if you have ownership, then if there's something wrong in your code, it's your fault.
3 replies 1 retweet 13 likes -
Replying to @sarahmei
Trouble is...that's always false. Claiming "ownership" only gives us the illusion of responsibility.
1 reply 0 retweets 22 likes -
Replying to @sarahmei
In reality, as developers, we could do everything right & still get tripped up by a misunderstanding several people removed.
1 reply 1 retweet 23 likes -
Replying to @sarahmei
If we don't have full responsibility, we don't have full ownership. Since we never have full responsibility, we never have full ownership.
1 reply 2 retweets 19 likes -
Replying to @sarahmei
But if we _claim_ ownership, some people will always assume that means we're fully responsible for problems.
3 replies 2 retweets 13 likes -
Replying to @sarahmei
I see this assumption most often in folks who haven't been devs, or are too long removed from it.
2 replies 1 retweet 13 likes -
Replying to @sarahmei
Moving to a collective ownership model for code aligns perceptions with reality.
2 replies 3 retweets 33 likes
Replying to @sarahmei
Yeah, but then you have to pay the runtime cost for reference counting
4:20 PM - 31 Jul 2017
0 replies
0 retweets
0 likes
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.