Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

> simply hasn't really fully scoped their NFRs which can often make a big difference in the design of the system.

"We're scaffolding / not implementing / delaying this part, until X, Y, Z are known." is a completely valid decision to officially make. And it helps with planning and development of related code. "I don't know, because of missing NFRs" is not a decision though.




Generally speaking, "we're scaffolding/not implementing/delaying this part" is something you can do with functional requirements, but not with non-functional requirements. Changing non-functional requirements like security, maintainability, or testability generally requires rewriting the whole system from scratch, incrementally or otherwise.


    > "We're scaffolding / not implementing / delaying this part, until X, Y, Z are known."
Isn't that the same thing as "not committing"? I'm very confused.


"what do we do with this part?"

Not committing: "I don't have enough info, don't know".

Decision: "We can only finish it once X is known. Until then we assume it behaves like (…). For code that relies on it, we're prioritising flexibility to change over perfect solution at this point. Y is responsible for announcing when X is known."




Consider applying for YC's Fall 2025 batch! Applications are open till Aug 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: