|
|
Posted by Harry Slaughter on 07/24/05 03:46
Michael Vilain wrote:
> In article <T9WdnUc9P8vOJXzfRVn-pg@comcast.com>,
> Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> wrote:
......
> They seem to have definite ideas about function and scalability. What
> about resources required? The site is going to handle uploading, so it
> will keep data. What about backings for that data in case of loss?
> What about bandwidth requirements? How long will the keep the data?
> Any scheme for archiving?
these are definitely issues that need to be handled at some point, but
they aren't really top priorities.
the question is really the fastest way to develop a site that will be
extensible, maintainable, down the road.
> they want. But I wouldn't offer any working site in that time-frame.
> I'd also require a retainer up-front and a signed contract outlining
> their responsibilities and my deliverables. I would not attempt to
> undertake creating anything they could "try out" in that 1-week
> timeframe.
I'm pretty much convinced that only a framework such as Drupal will
enable a single developer to meet the types of demands we're talking about.
> If this is the first time they've hired outside consulting or web
> development, they need to be educated on the development cycle. I
> wonder if a single-person shop can't really do something this complex
> without doing some degree of what I used to call "Hallmark programming"
> (i.e. "We only care enough to reuse the very best.") in their
> time-frame. I'm sure there are code monkeys out there that can and they
> charge accordingly.
LOL, that's a good one. The good ol' cut/paste design method, aka
glueware, aka unmaintainable junk. I'm all for borrowing, but you can't
borrow a whole lot before you have a big pile of unintelligible junk.
> Such "under the gun" projects can sometimes indicate a political
> situation. So part of my interviews would be to find out who's driving
> the requirements for the site--people who will use it, some project or
> marketing manager saw something "cool" and wants a site "like that", or
> something else. I'd meet with them to discuss scope of the project and
> find out how hard that deadline is. If they're paying fixed price or
> hourly, you could get others involved to code up something in a week,
> but without prioritizing their punch-list, it would be hard to commit to
> their timeline.
>
> I personally would turn down this type of project because of the
> political landmines I envision with their timeline and requirements.
> But that's me.
I'm hoping to turn this in to a legitimate project for myself. Dealing
with questionable time estimates is certainly preferable to dealing with
what you get in a big corprorate environemnt (at least IMHO).
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|