Defining the Role of a Staff Software Developer The role of a staff software developer is one of the most fluid and variable positions within a tech organization. Unlike more junior roles, where responsibilities are clearly defined and outcomes are straightforward, the expectations for a staff developer can often be nebulous. Each company has its unique culture, structure, and needs, which means that what is expected of a staff developer at one organization can be quite different from another.

Becoming a staff software developer is a significant milestone in a developer’s career. This role is often seen as the bridge between hands-on coding and higher-level strategic responsibilities. It’s a position that requires not only technical prowess but also the ability to influence, guide, and lead a team toward success.

When evaluating a complex software system, we must consider the architectural choice between microservices and monoliths. Many articles have been written on the difference between these two, but they mostly focus on the obvious. I'd like to dig a little deeper in this article. If you’re not quite clear on the distinction, here is a great article.

At work, I've started working on a new code base. This has me thinking about the best way do this. Code can sometimes be a real pain. You aren't just inheriting all the good stuff, you also take on all of the short cuts and half finished features that make up the technical debt of the project. A new code base is a package, you don't get to choose only the good parts. So where to start?

TL;DR Here's a sketch of a solution for hot-reloading that I hope will bring some greater flow to my development process. Present day solutions are more about shipping the final product, than they are about enjoying the process of coding. Hot-reloading is one of those features that once you have it, you just don't want to live without it again. So let's get hot-reloading like it's 1972!

wolf and elk I just finished reading "Managing Technical Debt", and while it provides some excellent ideas on the topic, I felt like it was missing something vital. The book focuses primarily on the technical side of the problem. The human factors however, are just as important. Not including them in our assessments is a major reason why we have so much trouble assessing the true cost of our technical debt. I think this omission is common in the industry, and I think it's time to change that.