How would sovereign development work in very small teams? Let's say it is just me and a subordinate, do I give that person ownership of some things and become their steward and then hold the rest for myself? Is sovereign development sensible with a small team?
Let's say you really only have a team of peer level programmers and above that you have business fuckery, how do you sensibly choose a sovereign? If you break up the existing code base into N kingdoms how do you coordinate between those kingdoms without an overall sovereign?
He goes over it in the latter half of the article. He mentions first one to come up with a working prototype for a given project should be the crown, because he is most intimately aware of the architecture and the initial implementation difficulties.
Also N different kingdom isn't the right analogy. The article states vassals who chose to be part of the project and owns a smaller piece of the overall project. If there is enough contention (primarily due to poor organization forms like undemocratic socialism), the article suggests, that there will be fundamental schism and malcontent participants either 1) form their own project 2) continue to disrupt the project with unproductive squabble.
The proponent of the Sovereign Software Development model tells us that successful software development projects all follow this natural order.
Personally I think bryanedds is right. Linux core development is a great example of what is being described.
2 comments
0 u/GuruFault 27 Dec 2015 21:52
How would sovereign development work in very small teams? Let's say it is just me and a subordinate, do I give that person ownership of some things and become their steward and then hold the rest for myself? Is sovereign development sensible with a small team?
Let's say you really only have a team of peer level programmers and above that you have business fuckery, how do you sensibly choose a sovereign? If you break up the existing code base into N kingdoms how do you coordinate between those kingdoms without an overall sovereign?
0 u/dchem 30 Dec 2015 19:55
He goes over it in the latter half of the article. He mentions first one to come up with a working prototype for a given project should be the crown, because he is most intimately aware of the architecture and the initial implementation difficulties.
Also N different kingdom isn't the right analogy. The article states
vassalswho chose to be part of the project and owns a smaller piece of the overall project. If there is enough contention (primarily due to poor organization forms like undemocratic socialism), the article suggests, that there will be fundamental schism and malcontent participants either 1) form their own project 2) continue to disrupt the project with unproductive squabble.The proponent of the Sovereign Software Development model tells us that successful software development projects all follow this natural order.
Personally I think bryanedds is right. Linux core development is a great example of what is being described.