Linked by snydeq on Thu 17th Nov 2011 22:47 UTC
General Development Fatal Exception's Neil McAllister discusses why code analysis and similar metrics provide little insight into what really makes an effective software development team, in the wake of a new scorecard system employed at IBM. "Code metrics are fine if all you care about is raw code production. But what happens to all that code once it's written? Do you just ship it and move on? Hardly - in fact, many developers spend far more of their time maintaining code than adding to it. Do your metrics take into account time spent refactoring or documenting existing code? Is it even possible to devise metrics for these activities?" McAllister writes, "Are developers who take time to train and mentor other teams about the latest code changes considered less productive than ones who stay heads-down at their desks and never reach out to their peers? How about teams that take time at the beginning of a project to coordinate with other teams for code reuse, versus those who charge ahead blindly? Can any automated tool measure these kinds of best practices?"
Permalink for comment 497647
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Comment by lucas_maximus
by lucas_maximus on Fri 18th Nov 2011 17:58 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by lucas_maximus"
Member since:

I am similar in that regard. I think it is because I moved from a Traditional Engineering disicipline ... then moved to software engineering .. I don't really have a hardcore coder background.

Others generally comment generally I think quite oddly and I tend to make connection between like playing Snooker and Jeet Kune Do ...

I think many managers also have problems with me at first, because I am a bit of a maverick. I want to do my job, I just do it my own way rather then the way they want me to. I also tend to self manage.

Reply Parent Score: 1