Ask HN: How do software devs spend time across a product's life cycle?

Post by scarface_74 » Thu, Feb 13, 2025, 2:39 AM UTC

ruraljuror wrote: post #10

scarface_74 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a team that no one interested in their career progression should ever be on. This is usually a dead end and almost impossible to spin in behavioral interviews.

Well, not my experience at all and combining that with the link I posted, I suspect you are mistaking what I am referring to. What are you basing your statement on?

Post by scarface_74 » Thu, Feb 13, 2025, 11:37 AM UTC

ruraljuror wrote: post #12

scarface_74 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let’s say I am interviewing two people with the same technical skills. One says that they have spent the last couple of years fixing bugs and analyzing the CI builds. The other talks about leading major new initiatives or being responsible for a major new feature and I dig into it. Guess which one I’m going to hire? In the terms of promo docs, which shows more “impact”, “scope” and “dealing with ambiguity”? https://w…

It sounds like you would hire the one building CRUD apps. Perhaps I was unclear in my original post, technical quality teams don’t analyze CI and fix bugs. The team in my org builds sophisticated tools to analyze CI runs and teams self service the bug fixes. When you are operating at large scale and delivering products, there is no limit to impact or scope; ambiguity is inherent.