Unusual mitap about Java in St. Petersburg on October 30
For those who are tired of technical meetings about libraries, tools, frameworks, we have prepared something completely different - a meeting-discussion “Java and bicycles: when should I invest in writing our own tools on the backend?”
We always have a choice. Develop the frameworks themselves, or take them from the supplier. Java, Spring, Hibernate, etc. If we take something out of the box, we can make a good product. If we want to create something special that significantly distinguishes us in comparison with competitors, the development of our own tools can be justified - we will understand exactly how it works, and we can squeeze the maximum out of it. So in what case does it make sense to invest in the development of internal-tools, and in which you can be content with ready-made solutions?
')
There are new versions of large frameworks for the main languages, open source development and one way or another, questions are raised, in what case does the project architect have the right to experiment with new technologies? When can these tools be deployed at company level? How much flexibility in the choice of technology depends on the size, age of the project, internal or external customers.
There are many differences between developing your own product and developing it to order - your own development lives by different rules, which is why the same solution can be bad for outsourcing, but beautiful and elegant in developing your product.
Program and speakers:
1. Dmitry Mamonov, Wrike "From bicycles to motorcycles: why developing your own solutions can be better than using ready-made frameworks."
I will tell you how the process of developing your own product differs from outsourcing projects from a technical point of view, when it makes sense to invest in development from scratch, and when it is better to take a ready-made solution. There will be a few examples of our projects, in which I will show what advantages we gained by taking to make our own decisions, and what difficulties we encountered in the process.
2. Vladimir Krasilshchik, Yandex “Welcome, or no entry for cyclists”
In your opinion, in a modern automobile industry, under what circumstances does an automaker invest in the development of its own window regulator, rather than take a ready, good and standard unit? Or when the auto concern is developing a new battery, and is not content with the standard one? Maybe even give an example of such a company?
Or here you are, how often do you personally personally assemble a vacuum cleaner with your own hands from improvised means, or, say, sew a suit to order in an atelier? Or, maybe, after all, a “normal” use case is a trip to the store and a choice of home assistant or new clothes from among the already finished products, perhaps with some compromises regarding their initial ideas about the ideal candidate, for example, in the form of missing pearl buttons or those present. wings?
But in our software development area, for some reason, writing our own bicycles was built almost to a romantic degree. Moreover, the developers are proud of their bikes, they actively share them and post them on github, demonstrating at least a ton of free time! Honestly, it seems to me that most of these “bikes” turn out to be either “Hello World” level projects, in order to learn something, or, like in that joke: “We don’t remember why we invented a billiard ball from which hair grows, but it was terribly difficult. ”
In my speech, as a pragmatic developer, I reflect on the questions that a “cyclist” or a “cyclist” should ask themselves before going to the Tour de France. I will give examples of libraries and frameworks, the appearance of which was, in my opinion, justified and dictated by a pragmatic approach, and also give examples of creations, the appearance of which I cannot explain, based on pragmatic considerations.
3. Vyacheslav Lapin, EPAM - “Breaking in the“ entry curve ””
The invention of "bicycles" - a great technique for learning! Novice artists basically copy paintings of masters, so why in IT NIH-syndrome is considered evil? After all, in order to understand how a library or framework works, it is best to independently try to solve the problem that they solve by writing, as a rule, something like that.
Since then, when our industry abandoned the model “got an education - went to work using accumulated knowledge until retirement”, and switched to a model of permanent, permanent training (in fact, training and work became one, unified process), the bicycle industry perfectly it supports this, actually composing the essence of the practice when training - we read tutorials, articles, watch presentations at conferences and try to try some of this in our combat projects, finding, thus, the shortest way along the “in An ode to a new technology.
However, this is often not the shortest, cheapest and safest way to solve customer’s business problems, so a rare customer will agree to this. Where in this situation to go "poor developer" - this will be discussed in my report.
→ Registration
→ Live webcast
We always have a choice. Develop the frameworks themselves, or take them from the supplier. Java, Spring, Hibernate, etc. If we take something out of the box, we can make a good product. If we want to create something special that significantly distinguishes us in comparison with competitors, the development of our own tools can be justified - we will understand exactly how it works, and we can squeeze the maximum out of it. So in what case does it make sense to invest in the development of internal-tools, and in which you can be content with ready-made solutions?
')
There are new versions of large frameworks for the main languages, open source development and one way or another, questions are raised, in what case does the project architect have the right to experiment with new technologies? When can these tools be deployed at company level? How much flexibility in the choice of technology depends on the size, age of the project, internal or external customers.
There are many differences between developing your own product and developing it to order - your own development lives by different rules, which is why the same solution can be bad for outsourcing, but beautiful and elegant in developing your product.
Program and speakers:
1. Dmitry Mamonov, Wrike "From bicycles to motorcycles: why developing your own solutions can be better than using ready-made frameworks."
I will tell you how the process of developing your own product differs from outsourcing projects from a technical point of view, when it makes sense to invest in development from scratch, and when it is better to take a ready-made solution. There will be a few examples of our projects, in which I will show what advantages we gained by taking to make our own decisions, and what difficulties we encountered in the process.
2. Vladimir Krasilshchik, Yandex “Welcome, or no entry for cyclists”
In your opinion, in a modern automobile industry, under what circumstances does an automaker invest in the development of its own window regulator, rather than take a ready, good and standard unit? Or when the auto concern is developing a new battery, and is not content with the standard one? Maybe even give an example of such a company?
Or here you are, how often do you personally personally assemble a vacuum cleaner with your own hands from improvised means, or, say, sew a suit to order in an atelier? Or, maybe, after all, a “normal” use case is a trip to the store and a choice of home assistant or new clothes from among the already finished products, perhaps with some compromises regarding their initial ideas about the ideal candidate, for example, in the form of missing pearl buttons or those present. wings?
But in our software development area, for some reason, writing our own bicycles was built almost to a romantic degree. Moreover, the developers are proud of their bikes, they actively share them and post them on github, demonstrating at least a ton of free time! Honestly, it seems to me that most of these “bikes” turn out to be either “Hello World” level projects, in order to learn something, or, like in that joke: “We don’t remember why we invented a billiard ball from which hair grows, but it was terribly difficult. ”
In my speech, as a pragmatic developer, I reflect on the questions that a “cyclist” or a “cyclist” should ask themselves before going to the Tour de France. I will give examples of libraries and frameworks, the appearance of which was, in my opinion, justified and dictated by a pragmatic approach, and also give examples of creations, the appearance of which I cannot explain, based on pragmatic considerations.
3. Vyacheslav Lapin, EPAM - “Breaking in the“ entry curve ””
The invention of "bicycles" - a great technique for learning! Novice artists basically copy paintings of masters, so why in IT NIH-syndrome is considered evil? After all, in order to understand how a library or framework works, it is best to independently try to solve the problem that they solve by writing, as a rule, something like that.
Since then, when our industry abandoned the model “got an education - went to work using accumulated knowledge until retirement”, and switched to a model of permanent, permanent training (in fact, training and work became one, unified process), the bicycle industry perfectly it supports this, actually composing the essence of the practice when training - we read tutorials, articles, watch presentations at conferences and try to try some of this in our combat projects, finding, thus, the shortest way along the “in An ode to a new technology.
However, this is often not the shortest, cheapest and safest way to solve customer’s business problems, so a rare customer will agree to this. Where in this situation to go "poor developer" - this will be discussed in my report.
→ Registration
→ Live webcast
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/339842/
All Articles