On 3 June 2015 at 14:50, Noah Misch <n...@leadboat.com> wrote: > I > > would define the subject matter as "bug fixes, testing and review", not > "restructuring, testing and review." Different code structures are > clearest > to different hackers. Restructuring, on average, adds bugs even more > quickly > than feature development adds them. >
+1 to this. Rewriting or restructuring code because you don't trust it (even though you have no reported real-world bugs) is a terrible idea. Stopping all feature development to do it is even worse. I know you're not talking about rewriting, but I think http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000069.html is always worth a re-read, if only because it's funny :) I would always 100% support a decision to push back new releases because of bugfixes for *known* issues, but if you think you *might *be able to find bugs in code you don't like, you should do that on your own time. Iff you find actual bugs, *then *you talk about halting new releases. Geoff
