blob: 6a196921a5dd17e5cdaa9149d891afca6fc98e63 (
plain)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
|
# Renaming features
Sometimes the business asks to change the name of a feature. Broadly speaking, there are 2 approaches to that task. They basically trade between immediate effort and future complexity/bug risk:
- Complete, rename everything in the repo.
- Pros: does not increase code complexity.
- Cons: more work to execute, and higher risk of immediate bugs.
- Façade, rename as little as possible; only the user-facing content like interfaces,
documentation, error messages, etc.
- Pros: less work to execute.
- Cons: increases code complexity, creating higher risk of future bugs.
## When to choose the façade approach
The more of the following that are true, the more likely you should choose the façade approach:
- You are not confident the new name is permanent.
- The feature is susceptible to bugs (large, complex, needing refactor, etc).
- The renaming will be difficult to review (feature spans many lines/files/repos).
- The renaming will be disruptive in some way (database table renaming).
## Consider a façade-first approach
The façade approach is not necessarily a final step. It can (and possibly *should*) be treated as the first step, where later iterations will accomplish the complete rename.
|
