Comment by catlifeonmars
17 days ago
To your point, I’d say the dev team deserves some leeway, but the employer (Anthropic) is raking in the $$$ and doesn’t deserve any sympathy for underfunding the CC team.
17 days ago
To your point, I’d say the dev team deserves some leeway, but the employer (Anthropic) is raking in the $$$ and doesn’t deserve any sympathy for underfunding the CC team.
Do you suggest hiring 1000 extra devs to close the issues? At some point, it doesnt actually scale. Whos to say they havent hit that limit already?
Funding doesn’t _necessarily_ mean hiring more devs.
To your point about hiring 1000 devs not solving anything: I agree. For a project of this scope, you’re probably going to peak at one or two 3 person teams with at least one principal dev per team with deep experience in the tech stack and in architecting/building TUIs in general. I would hope their devs are making a relatively lucrative salary too, to attract talent.
I have no idea what the internal structure is so this is just pure speculation: judging by the backlog of issues on their GH, they could use better community management and developer relations. I suspect they’re riding on the existing hype/community interest to fulfill these functions but that only provides a piece of the puzzle.
> For a project of this scope, you’re probably going to peak at one or two 3 person teams with at least one principal dev per team
I think thats probably 1 team short, but I agree on the order of magnitude. So if we assume 12 devs, how long do we think its going to take to fix 5k github issues lol?
Again, I 100% agree the flicker bug should be at the top of the list. And I agree their products in general are riddled with bugs. But Im just saying I can understand the situation even if I think this specific bug should have been fixed already if they were regularly using a setup that runs into it (which I have to assume they arent).