Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

2
  • Can you add some clarification to what you mean by, "Handing out decisions by edict is a terrible way for any development team to run"? I agree with the rest of your post but I only agree with the mentioned statement in certain ways but not others. For example, how would it be decided to use SOA over a database tier? Wouldn't that have been an edict or wouldn't someone have to have the final say? I ask because I am a team lead and ran into this very situation. I made a call not to use SOA based on business need. There just isn't enough time to allow all developers to discuss/argue every point. Commented Jun 27, 2014 at 16:41
  • @Brian making architecture decisions would be a story in a sprint, probably one earmarked for a specific member but otherwise the same as any other story. It should be subjected to peer review like any other story. The time argument is bullshit, if you happened to miss X or decided to try Z that everyone else on the team isn't familiar with you WILL spend more time developing as a result, even a full day of arguing about design would be insignificant comparatively. A simple meeting/review to say "I chose A because X,Y,Z." would likely take an hour and get just made it a collaborative effort. Commented Jun 30, 2014 at 17:27