Comparing your cloud based CRUD app to a missile is a perfect illustration. There is no dishonor in admitting that our stuff isn't going to kill anyone if there is a bug. Don't write bad code, but also sometimes just getting something out the door is much better than perfect quality (bird in the hand and all that).
> Don't write bad code, but also sometimes just getting something out the door is much better than perfect quality (bird in the hand and all that).
Your bank account can be represented as a CR app, it's two letters short of CRUD, but it doesn't make it simple or simpler in any sense of the words.
Now the question: how much are you tolerant to bugs in your bank account? How often can they happen before you complain?
My point is that for most software engineering getting a product out is more important that a super high quality bar that slows everything down.
If you are writing banking software or flight control systems please do it with care, if you are making some React based recipe website or something I don't really care (99% of software engineering falls into this latter category in my opinion).
Software engineers need to get over themselves a bit, AI really exposed how many were just getting by making repetitive junk and thinking they were special.
Many software engineers write software for people who won't like the idea that their request/case can be ignored/failed/lost, when expressed openly on the front page of your business offering. Are bookings important enough? Are gifts for significant events important? Maybe you're okay with losing my code commits every once in a while, I don't know. And I'm not sure why you think it's okay to spread this bad management idea of "not valuable or critical enough" among engineers who should know better and who should keep sources of bad ideas at bay when it comes to software quality in general.