RE: Service Programs VS normal Programs (Jon Paris)

["Joe Pluta" <joepluta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> From: Wayne.James@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> 
> <rant>
> You mean instead of writing "another" one-off, key, fragile,
temperamental
> patch to the "ball-of-mud" production system you already have?  In the
> same RPG-II(I) style you've always used because "everyone knows how to
> read it"?
> 
> I'm sorry.  Jon's right.  When did it become the "right thing to do"
to
> viciously fight against using "new techniques" that are now 5-10 years
> old?

I think there's a tiny bit too much caffeine in this conversation
<grin>.  I would remind you that the folks making the statement that
change for change's sake is wrong are some of the folks who innovate the
most on the platform.  Examples: I've been doing more with Java and the
iSeries than most people on the list, and Brad wrote the book
(literally) on CGI programming.  James is an accomplished MI programmer
and Reeve's been pushing the envelope on database design and ILE for as
long as I remember seeing him on the lists.  I don't think you can call
us RPG II types.

We're NOT saying to stop innovation.  We're NOT fighting against new
techniques.  Speaking for myself, I'm saying that change for change's
sake often causes more problems than it solves, and that new techniques
should only be introduced into production once they've been tested and
found to deliver an adequate ROI.  If every programmer is allowed to do
her own thing in every program, then suddenly you have a mishmash, and
nobody can maintain anything without first learning some new technique.

In a perfect world, that would actually be kind of cool: every
programming task would require learning a new skill.  But in the real
world, that tends to reduce productivity to the point where people don't
get their work done in a timely fashion.

In any case, I certainly don't disparage innovation. I love it. I
embrace it. But I also recognize it as a potentially disruptive force in
a production environment and that disruption must be weighed against the
good the change will provide.  That's all.

Joe