Not Invented Here update
March 10th, 2009
software
Seb has posted an update clarifying the intent behind his post regarding the Software Craftsmanship manifesto.
My main objection was that Seb was a little ill informed and had chosen, incorrectly, to single out Jase publicly.
He’s explained that he felt he had no other option in order to open a discussion on the topic. Email and telephone presumably far too traditional a means of making a formal invitation to someone in these heady days of web 2.0 but who am I to point out how easily you can find them on the contact page of his site, let’s just leave at that. He’s my brother and I stuck up for him. End of. But I concede that it did open a debate and that can only be good for everyone participating.
Seb makes final conclusion that if there’s a competing regular meeting which would strive to build on the energy and enthusiasm so evident at the conference last month this might lead to the collapse of interest in the alt.net evenings.
I don’t really believe this. But it’s what I suspected was going on with the post (”Not invented here” being the title of my original response.) I thought that alt.net focused exclusively on the .NET platform and as such I’m not really clear as to what direct relationship it might have with a regular meeting to do hands on practice but with no particular emphasis on platform or technology. Actually, I’m at a loss as to how it would be a threat to it at all to be perfectly honest.
What I got from the conference is that it really wasn’t anything to do with .NET or Ruby or Java or any particular proprietary silo. It was about the skills that apply to software development regardless of platform, language or setting. Having spent an hour an hour pairing in Java with another .NET developer at the conference I can say in my personal experience that it worked. The lessons were universal.
On craftsmanship (ignoring the semantic arguments) I really don’t get how there can be anything to debate about this. Arguing local optima is as redundant as expecting people to jump in front of moving traffic simply because everyone around them is doing the same. And equally not stopping to clean up as soon as you see duplication, or redundant misleading comments or unit test fixtures that don’t actually test anything just because they surround you is the same. You shouldn’t succumb to the broken windows, in my personal opinion.
By spending a little time thinking for ourselves rather than slavishly following platform guidance or shoehorning yet another framework that promises it’ll let everyone not have to bother thinking about design in the small because it’s given so much design in the big that nothing can possibly go wrong now, we may get more done in the long run. Who, knows. I know that in my personal experience the guys I’ve worked with the have impressed me the most produce a quality of work that humbles me (not hard I know) and they do it PDQ. They just have great development chops and they never stop training them.
I think that the intent of the London conference was all about getting past paying lip service to all of this stuff and actually sitting down and doing it. Getting past the hand waving and platform marketing crap and down to the code.
If anything regular comes out of it, I genuinely hope there is no adverse affect on what you’re involved with in alt.net, but I doubt there would be.
In terms of learning more about it all, I’m not sure what the problem is. Most of the material up for practice has been published in book form for a fair while and there’s a tonne of helpful people blogging articles about it. Clean Code was out last year as was Implementation Patterns and the Fowler series on patterns and Martin books on practices and principles are very long published.

