记录技术债务的关键项目有哪些?

发布于 2024-09-26 17:37:55 字数 70 浏览 1 评论 0原文

我正在 Office 中建立一个技术债务登记册,并希望使其成为一个相当全面的工具。

我们应该记录哪些关键信息?

I'm setting up a technical debt register at The Office and want to make it a fairly comprehensive tool.

What are the key pieces of information that we should be recording?

如果你对这篇内容有疑问,欢迎到本站社区发帖提问 参与讨论,获取更多帮助,或者扫码二维码加入 Web 技术交流群。

扫码二维码加入Web技术交流群

发布评论

需要 登录 才能够评论, 你可以免费 注册 一个本站的账号。

评论(1

再浓的妆也掩不了殇 2024-10-03 17:37:55

首先 - 您希望保持寄存器非常简单,否则维护寄存器的开销将阻止人们使用它,并且比实际解决它要解决的技术债务浪费更多的时间。 ...

如果您仍然决定继续,我建议保留一个简单的寄存器,它是一个平面文件/简单数据库/Google 电子表格,其中包含以下字段:

  • 模块/组件名称
  • 需要修复的内容的描述(您可能有类别列表,但我认为这也需要一个文本行)
  • 以天为单位的估计修复时间(我倾向于坚持整数天,否则人们会倾向于开始记录琐碎的小事情)
  • 哪个开发人员产生债务(并提供固定时间估计)
  • 产生债务的项目(暗示任何项目经理负责)

规则如下:

  • 开发人员应对技术债务保持透明。如果开发人员因项目压力而需要承担技术债务,则开发人员应将其与预计修复时间一起添加到日志中。
  • 项目经理对他们产生的技术债务负责(即他们是否迫使开发人员走捷径?)。他们应该能够为债务总额的增加提供可靠的商业理由,并提出应该采取哪些措施来解决这个问题。
  • 如果没有注意到技术债务,那么代码预计将具有最高质量并通过任何相关的代码审查。如果注意到技术债务,那么开发人员就可以得到所记录的任何内容的“通行证”(审查可能会有助于考虑债务记录的准确性以及应该采取哪些措施来修复的想法)。
  • 开发人员应对修复时间给出合理的估计。如果他们说重构架构需要两天的时间,那么如果稍后给他们两天时间来修复它,他们就不会感到惊讶......

我认为这种方法将创造一个良好的动态整体 - 开发人员已经有责任保持透明并考虑如何解决技术债务,项目经理/业务主管必须做出权衡,但很明显,债务成本是他们的责任,最好的开发人员和架构师将因完成技术债务而获得荣誉艰难的项目,同时还要控制技术债务。

First of all - you want to keep your register very simple, otherwise the overhead of maintaining the register will stop people from using it and waste more time than actually fixing the technical debt it was meant to solve.....

If you still decide to go ahead, I'd suggest keeping a simple register which is a flat file / simple database / Google spreadsheet with the following fields:

  • Module/component name
  • Description of what needs to be fixed (you might have a list of categories but I think this also need a text one-liner)
  • Estimated fix time in days (I'd be inclined to insist on whole numbers of days, otherwise people will have a tendency to start logging trivially small things)
  • Which developer incurred the debt (and provided the fix time estimate)
  • Which project the debt was incurred on (any by implication, which project manager is accountable)

Rules are as follows:

  • Developers are expected to be transparent about technical debt. If a developer needs to incur technical debt due to project pressures, the developer should add this to the log with their estimated fix time.
  • Project managers are accountable for technical debt that they run up (i.e. did they pressure developers to take shortcuts?). They should be able to justify a solid business justification for the total debt run up, and propose what should be done to fix it.
  • If no technical debt is noted, then the code is expected to be of top quality and pass any relevant code reviews. If technical debt is noted, then the developer gets a "pass" for whatever is noted (the review might instead helpfully consider the accuracy of the debt logging and ideas on what should be done to fix).
  • Developers are expected to give fair estimates for the fix time. If they say it will take two days to refactor the architecture, then they shouldn't be surprised if they are given two days to fix it at some later time....

I think this approach will create a good dynamic overall - developers have a responsibility to be transparent and think about how to solve technical debt, project managers / business leads have to make the trade-offs but it is clear that the costs of debt are their responsibility, the best developers and architects will get kudos for completing the tough projects while also keeping technical debt under control.

~没有更多了~
我们使用 Cookies 和其他技术来定制您的体验包括您的登录状态等。通过阅读我们的 隐私政策 了解更多相关信息。 单击 接受 或继续使用网站,即表示您同意使用 Cookies 和您的相关数据。
原文