No? You work on something and finish it. At most I have 2-3 feature branches open. If none are in review, I have commits in them with current work. Maybe I use the stash 2-3 times a year when I am heavily experimenting with different implementations.
I have always hated how we deal with feature flags; often times as a dev I implement it, but then business decides how the flags are used, which comes back to us having to set them. I want to make this something that can be used by both easily, and priced fairly - looking at how much others charge for a feature flag SaaS is insane.
Currently I'm in heavy testing by myself, as I am quite worried about issues (that's just my personality), but yeah. It started as a normal side project for me to train a bit, then I added a bit of agentic coding to it to also learn it, and now it's here.
Not really. If pay decreases it's because you're not required anymore or less, which is contrary to what has been shown. IF educating and enabling juniors etc. is not handled correctly, then senior pay will explode, because whilst they are much more efficient, their inherent knowledge is required to produce sustainable results.
Skills are literally technical documentation for your project it seems. So now we can finally argue for time to write doc, just name it "AI enhancing skill definitions"
Yeah this seems too insane to be true. I understand that wifi signal strength etc. is heavily impacted by the contents of a room, but even so it seems farfetched that there is enough information in its distortion to lead to these results.