On Fri, 2003-06-06 at 06:33, Christian Taubman wrote:
> > What would happen if I changed the process? I don't know - I've
> > chosen the best approach I know, given the constraints of my
> > situation. If there is another way to set it up, I'd be happy to
> > learn it.
>
> Yes, those constraints can be a real bummer :)
>

Worse, they can become invisible walls.

When I was a kid, I spent a fair bit of time at a stable. Many of the
fences were these pleasant-looking, weathered wooden split-rail deals,
which any of the horses could have turned into splinters in short order.
They also had a small bare wire running around the inside of them, which
got a moderate pulse of current every five seconds or so.

The horses quickly learned to stay away from the fence, and they learned
it so thoroughly that the the fence could stay unplugged for weeks at a
time, at least until a new horse came by.


When new clients start getting the "that's so impossible I won't even
think about it" look, it's often during telling them that I want to add
automated tests. My solution is I tell them what I really want:

You know how word processors do that red squiggle thing when you
spell a word wrong? I want it so that my IDE does that every
time I make a mistake. But not just a spelling mistake. Every
time I type, I want my IDE to spin off a parallel universe, ship
the product to several hundred thousand users, carefully collect
and tabulate their opinions, and see if what I type is a net
improvement. If not, then the word turns red, with a helpful
little popup, "Warning! Will cause confusion in some
grandmothers, resulting in lost emails to grandchildren.
Increase font size by 2 points."

Then, having pointed out the horizon and all the land outside it,
they're much more willing to take one little step outside the fence.


William


--
brains for sale: http://scissor.com/