• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

One for the coders - am I getting burned?

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #31
    Welp cheers for all the responses and info - much appreciated.

    I have been working with the guy for 7 years and normally I just agree what is needed with the dev guys and they deliver in the agreed timescales which works well all around.

    was wondering if he was working on plan B.

    seems like I will need to press him for a bit more info.

    Comment


      #32
      Is the new field mandatory, and if so what value will you put in for the data that already exists? Are there indexes on the table that need to be redesigned, or does a new one need to be added? Is the list of values going to remain relatively static, or will it be dynamic over time? What documentation are you expecting? What release procedures have you got in place to deliver this into the different environments? How complicated is the existing code that he needs to modify to deal with the new field? Does there need to be any additional validation on the field?

      A few years back, I saw an Oracle presentation around the implementation of the business requirement "we need to limit the text in this field to 140 characters". Sometimes it's not quite as straightforward as you would think, and there may well be things that he's spotted that you haven't. Ask him for a breakdown though.
      Best Forum Advisor 2014
      Work in the public sector? You can read my FAQ here
      Click here to get 15% off your first year's IPSE membership

      Comment


        #33
        Originally posted by woohoo View Post
        The timescale seems excessive but if he is working with some really awful legacy code...
        This is what I'm wondering. Only he's the author of the legacy code...
        Down with racism. Long live miscegenation!

        Comment


          #34
          Originally posted by NotAllThere View Post
          This is what I'm wondering. Only he's the author of the legacy code...
          That was why I mention llbprogen in my previous comment. There are a set of historic ORMs that save hours when you start off but create weeks of pain if / when you ever want to change the slightest anything...

          On the one I inherited I insisted on it requiring a total rewrite. Client were happy to loss the entire government contract rather than swallow the rewrite cost....
          merely at clientco for the entertainment

          Comment


            #35
            Originally posted by NotAllThere View Post
            This is what I'm wondering. Only he's the author of the legacy code...
            Yup indeed he is!

            In addition the work we are trying to do is actually pretty much already in place in other areas of the system. So it is not even a new concept.

            Although as The Faqqer says there may be many other things beside just creating the code to consider...
            although again we have done this before and know there is not a lot!

            I have just tasked him with reading up on another development and giving me ideas/input on best options and potential pitfalls - along with the all important effort required.

            Comment

            Working...
            X