Jokes on them I charge by the hour
Hours of work
Submitted 10 months ago by TechCodecPawx@programming.dev to programmer_humor@programming.dev
https://programming.dev/pictrs/image/aabe2c49-95f4-442b-801b-815996453406.webp
Comments
BearJCC@lemmy.sdf.org 10 months ago
jet@hackertalks.com 10 months ago
I was about to say. Rejoice! If this is a client these are billable hours
sip@programming.dev 10 months ago
yea, but it stops being fun when they say it’s a bug and it’s always supposed to work like that.
bob_wiley@lemmy.world 10 months ago
[deleted]RagnarokOnline@reddthat.com 10 months ago
“When you do things the right way, people won’t be sure you’ve done anything at all.”
agressivelyPassive@feddit.de 10 months ago
That’s why you get everything in writing. No change without detailed description of what you’re doing and a written reply stating that yes, this is what they want. Otherwise you’ll be in a constant refactoring treadmill.
fsxylo@sh.itjust.works 10 months ago
It’s a good thing I’m a hobbyist so that I can avoi- hmm, now that I think about it this feature could be really cool and shouldn’t take too long to implement…
queque31@lemmy.world 10 months ago
2am me: why the fuck this doesn’t work anymore!!!
douglasg14b@programming.dev 10 months ago
If you do this enough you know how to design your solutions to be relatively flexible. At least for your backends.
Your frontend will always churn, that’s the nature of the job.
vivadanang@lemm.ee 10 months ago
Your frontend will always churn, that’s the nature of the job.
Yep. The trick is to be gone before anyone finds the gross stuff needed to make it all work.
gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 10 months ago
Bro that’s just Tuesday
Immersive_Matthew@sh.itjust.works 10 months ago
I just had to rewrite all my code for 3rd time in a row and I am the customer. Ughhhh
ripened_avacado@lemmy.world 10 months ago
Twitter API user found.
Immersive_Matthew@sh.itjust.works 10 months ago
I mean I am the one causing myself to have to rewrite my code. I am developing a VR Theme Park.
jadegear@lemm.ee 10 months ago
Sounds like job security to me.
idunnololz@lemmy.world 10 months ago
Jokes on you, I like refactoring code.
deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz 10 months ago
Refactoring is healthy for code.
This is a good thing!
peopleproblems@lemmy.world 10 months ago
3 years and $5m down the drain for something we just got in production this year.
Could have been worse?
Feathercrown@lemmy.world 10 months ago
I pretend I do not see it
Duke_Nukem_1990@feddit.de 10 months ago
Thats what end of life-ing your products is for 😎
Jerkface@lemmy.world 10 months ago
How about end of life-ing your client?
bruhduh@lemmy.world 10 months ago
😎
ExtraMedicated@lemmy.world 10 months ago
3 months ago:
“Can you comfirm that each user account can have no more than one of these entities?”
“Yes. Definitely.”
Today:
“Oh by the way, we have some users who need to have multiple entities. Can you fix it?”
jadero@programming.dev 10 months ago
I eventually learned to never trust any restrictions on the user.
I quickly learned to make sure everyone had a copy of decisions made, so that I could charge by the hour for changes. I eventually learned to include examples of what would and would not be possible in any specification or change order.
theKalash@feddit.ch 10 months ago
I’m in the exact same boat right now.
Also this change from 1:1 to 1:n entity was like one “minor” feature in a rather larger list of feature requests. It so far has caused more work then all the other features combined.
agressivelyPassive@feddit.de 10 months ago
And months later you’ll find out, that your change completely fucks over some internal optimizer statistic and causes the DB to turn into lava.
I definitely don’t know that, because of several hour long outages and millions of lost revenue.
FuntyMcCraiger@sh.itjust.works 10 months ago
Or worse, it was an n:1 and they want it n:n
sphericth0r@kbin.social 10 months ago
Even worse, they'll claim it was a bug
sip@programming.dev 10 months ago
this is ongoing now. Our “creators” were supposed to be “matched” for a “job” based on “skills”, not “skill”. pure chaos
eluvatar@programming.dev 10 months ago
Oof