I think I initially agreed to use a new framework, but after risk analysis and audits on current software, I am hesitant to use a new framework (eg Angular) for critical systems.
- The current development stack can be supported by both myself and the employee.
- Hiring "new framework" staff would cost a lot, we don't have the budget to hire these developers (I am aware this employee wants to leave anyway).
- If we use a new framework, I would have to learn it (I don't have the time or the interest).
- The framework already has had non-backwards compatible update, I am concerned if it happens again.
- External auditing requirements are high, "paper work"/validation heavy, so I would rather manage as simple system / stack as possible, easy to maintain.
- Even the visual theme, I'm saying to stick with our 5 year old "bootstrap" one, there's no point to add a new one.
I've made them aware of this but they still don't get it. They are a better developer than me, and they say that "new framework" will allow "faster" development. But from my point of view, solid delivery and maintainability is more important. Especially if staff will change.
I've let them develop some apps in "new framework" (dashboards/widgets) as I understand there should be some career dev, but for critical systems it's too risky.
Is the developer just concerned for themselves and not the team/project? If they are not happy here, should I push them to leave?
By "fast" from his perspective is implementation, coding it and being able to adapt to future change requests - I see that. But for me it is not just the coding, we have testing and documentation, new bugs from moving to a new stack, etc. The old tools/current stack we have we have ironed out issues - it is "mature". With a new set, there will be new issues to resolve - just like when we first moved to the current stack, there were issues to resolve.
Update - I was told by this developer that what I was saying is bull***, loudly in the corridor, similarly in a communal area in front of people. I understand there is conflict, but is that a good way to deal with your manager or even someone you manage? It felt like dealing with a child/teenager. If I disagree with the COO, I'd sent him a few links and sources.