upvote
You aren't supposed to read code, but do you from time to time, just to evaluate what is going on?
reply
More of a comment than a question:

> Those of us building software factories must practice a deliberate naivete

This is a great way to put it, I've been saying "I wonder which sacred cows are going to need slaughtered" but for those that didn't grow up on a farm, maybe that metaphor isn't the best. I might steal yours.

This stuff is very interesting and I'm really interested to see how it goes for you, I'll eagerly read whatever you end up putting out about this. Good luck!

EDIT: oh also the re-implemented SaaS apps really recontextualizes some other stuff I’ve been doing too…

reply
> "I wonder which sacred cows are going to need slaughtered"

Or a vegan or Hindu. Which ethics are you willing to throw away to run the software factory?

I eat hamburgers while aware of the moral issues.

reply
I’ve been building using a similar approach[1] and my intuition is that humans will be needed at some points in the factory line for specific tasks that require expertise/taste/quality. Have you found that the be the case? Where do you find that humans should be involved in the process of maximal leverage?

To name one probable area of involvement: how do you specify what needs to be built?

[1] https://sociotechnica.org/notebook/software-factory/

reply
You're absolutely right ;)

Your intuition/thinking definitely lines up with how we're thinking about this problem. If you have a good definition of done and a good validation harness, these agents can hill climb their way to a solution.

But you still need human taste/judgment to decide what you want to build (unless your solution is to just brute force the entire problem space).

For maximal leverage, you should follow the mantra "Why am I doing this?" If you use this enough times, you'll come across the bottleneck that can only be solved by you for now. As a human, your job is to set the higher-level requirements for what you're trying to build. Coming up with these requirements and then using agents to shape them up is acceptable, but human judgment is definitely where we have to answer what needs to be built. At the same time, I never want to be doing something the models are better at. Until we crack the proactiveness part, we'll be required to figure out what to do next.

Also, it looks like you and Danvers are working in the same space, and we love trading notes with other teams working in this area. We'd love to connect. You can either find my personal email or shoot me an email at my work email: navan.chauhan [at] strongdm.com

reply
I know you're not supposed to look at the code, but do you have things in place to measure and improve code quality anyway?

Not just code review agents, but things like "find duplicated code and refactor it"?

reply
A few overnight “attractor” workflows serve distinct purposes:

* DRYing/Refactoring if needed

* Documentation compaction

* Security reviews

reply