There is a version of software development that feels productive: move fast, ship often, fix things when they break. It works right up until it does not. Projects built this way tend to accumulate quiet debt — decisions that made sense under deadline pressure but slowly become load-bearing walls no one wants to touch. Getting ahead of that pattern is the whole game.

The most reliable codebases share a few traits. They are boring. The architecture is predictable, the naming is consistent, and the folder structure does not require a guided tour to understand. Boring code is easy to read six months after you wrote it, easy for a new developer to pick up, and easy to change when requirements shift. Excitement in software usually means someone solved a problem in a clever way that nobody else can maintain.

Testing matters more than most teams act like it does. Not because tests catch every bug — they do not — but because writing a test forces you to think about what the code is actually supposed to do. That pressure surfaces edge cases, unclear requirements, and implicit assumptions before they become production incidents. A codebase with solid test coverage is a codebase you can refactor with confidence instead of anxiety.

Dependencies and the Cost of Convenience

Adding a library is easy. Removing one is not. Every dependency is a handshake agreement that your project will stay compatible as that package evolves, or that you will maintain a fork when it does not. For small utilities, the trade-off is usually fine. For anything critical to your data model or authentication layer, the calculus changes. The instinct to reach for a package every time a problem arises deserves to be questioned. A well-placed function you own is worth more than a dependency you cannot audit.

This is not an argument against using libraries — open-source software is the foundation of almost everything built today. It is an argument for being intentional. Know what you are taking on. Read the changelog. Understand what the package actually does at the boundary where your data enters and exits. The libraries that last in a codebase are the ones where someone made a considered choice, not a convenient one.

Third-party integrations deserve special attention. APIs change, pricing changes, companies get acquired or shut down. Building tight coupling to any external service is a liability. Wrapping external calls behind a service layer gives you the option to swap the provider without rewriting half the application.

Shipping and Maintaining Are Both Part of the Job

Software that never ships helps no one. The goal is not perfect code in the abstract — it is working software in the hands of the people who need it. That means accepting that some decisions will be wrong and building in enough flexibility to correct them. It also means investing in the basics: readable error messages, logging that makes production debugging possible, deployment pipelines that give you confidence before code reaches users.

Maintenance is where most software actually lives. The first release is a small fraction of the total effort over the life of a product. Every hour spent making the codebase easier to navigate, the tests faster to run, and the deployment process less fragile pays dividends across every future change. It is less dramatic than a new feature but more valuable in the long run.

The projects that hold up are the ones where someone treated the ongoing work of maintenance as part of the product, not an interruption to it.

Title

Building Software That Works Long-Term