https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSeeNd7T0Zj9zOl8Y2MP1YITPk_qNUIP5knfCqSmOH2oB2O_UQ/viewform
]]>brew bundle support, brew version-install, new -full formula handling and installer updates.
]]>For coworkers only, sometimes fine explaining your testing and why reviewed isn’t necessary e.g. a one-time script.
https://simonwillison.net/guides/agentic-engineering-patterns/anti-patterns/
]]>https://tomwojcik.com/posts/2026-02-15/finding-the-right-amount-of-ai/
]]>There’s nothing Homebrew can do about this. Google needs to fix it.
Please put me in contact with someone at Google high enough level to actually fix it.
]]>Empathy is needed more for OSS sustainability than money.
]]>Nice look at what some previous claims were (and how they resulted in more developers and more software).
https://www.caimito.net/en/blog/2025/12/07/the-recurring-dream-of-replacing-developers.html
]]>Mike McQuaid explains how Homebrew grew from a side project into macOS’s de facto package manager and how the project is sustained today.
]]>Minimum Viable Management
David Yee, VP of Engineering at The New York Times and head of its new AI platforms and products mission, joins Mike McQuaid and Neha Batra for a candid, behind-the-scenes conversation about why institutions are built to resist change and what to do about it. They dig into hidden norms, choosing the right battles, translating “how things really work” and creating stability for teams while you deliberately destabilize the system just enough to move it forward.
]]>Mike McQuaid joins Quincy Larson to discuss career lessons and the software engineering skills worth prioritizing next.
]]>I still have to manage my own screen habits carefully and most of my procrastination takes the form of “bad screen time”.
That tension sits at the heart of how I approach screens with my kids. I don’t want to overreact and forbid my kids from using any “screens” but I also don’t want to set them up to fail in a much more deliberately addictive landscape than the one I grew up in.
Screen time, be it for adults or children, has various dimensions:
You can likely tell from my wording which I consider to be “better” and “worse”. It’s not that any of the “worse” options are inherently bad but I want to forbid them for now and discourage them as the kids get older.
For our kids (currently 6 and 8 years old), we’ve banned short-form video, screens in their own bedrooms and indirectly paid content.
As a result, both kids currently mostly choose and prefer paid, creative games, often played with each other. The intention isn’t to maintain these rules forever but to loosen them gradually as self-regulation improves with age.
As a fairly active family that has a (hyperactive) dog, likes to exercise together and lives in Scotland, we want to ensure that “screen time” is balanced out with physical activity. This means if there’s days that are very short (thanks Scottish winter), have horrific weather or have had a lot of intense physical activity, we may be a bit more lenient on screens.
The standard level looks like:
When there’s no chores to be done, I may also indulge in a bit of cheeky screen time myself at the weekend too when kids are enjoying theirs.
Having this be structured and predictable for both adults and kids has reduced sadness and anger around screen time restrictions.
Our kids obviously still push the boundaries sometimes but they understand why (and sometimes enforce them themselves).
We have a fairly hard stop at the given time/time limit but aren’t too rigid about e.g. letting them finish off a current “round” or save the game before stopping.
I expect as kids to get older we are more lenient about “rules” and instead move to “recommendations based on experience”. I suspect it will help that we minimally use social media around them and keep phones away at family meal times. Kids (rightfully) sniff-out hypocrisy and respond poorly to it.
When we’re travelling internationally, things are a little different. Our kids can’t get up and run around or exercise and it makes life a little easier for everyone to be flexible.
We save iPads for the aircraft or train, require headphones (kids don’t like it but learning to be considerate is important) and don’t limit time. When we’re at our destination, iPads are hidden for the rest of the trip. Any remaining screen time is watching live TV, 1990s style.
When we eat out, iPads stay at home. We instead bring books, comics or colouring to meals and try to keep kids engaged (and our own phones away).
We’ve found Lego, comic books, colouring books and reading books to them to all be good non-device alternatives. For non-screen devices we’ve found audiobooks from an adult’s phone (particularly in the car) and a Yoto player for each child to be helpful.
Both our kids love their Yotos and generally fall asleep with them and we rely on the auto-mute feature at their sleep time. They also use it to know when they can get up and sometimes enjoy sitting in bed listening in the morning. More sleep for the adults, bliss!
As a household, we’re pretty much all-in on Apple products where possible. If you’re similar, the following tips may be useful:
All of this means that the default enforcement is done by the device/Apple and not by the parent and they are trusted to freely explore a safe device without oversight.
These all help to avoid issues I’ve heard friends report with inappropriate content in games, kids racking up spending in games, tantrums from unclear boundaries and other negative consequences. The only downside I’ve found is that you can expect your kids to kick your ass at games earlier than expected.
Thanks to Brian Corcoran for complimenting my approach here in the pub one day and requesting this post.
]]>Minimum Viable Management
Performance reviews have a reputation for being stressful, confusing and often disconnected from reality. Too often they surface feedback that should have been shared months earlier or reduce a year of work into a single rating. In this episode, Mike and Neha unpack why reviews fail and how managers can turn them into a useful summary instead of a shock.
They explore what companies expect from performance reviews, what managers struggle with and what employees actually want to hear. The conversation covers documenting early signals, balancing positive and critical feedback, avoiding ruinous empathy and ensuring no one walks into a review surprised by the outcome. They also discuss practical ways to give feedback throughout the life of a project, align on growth goals and handle mismatches between perception and reality. A grounded, experience-based discussion for anyone responsible for giving or receiving feedback.
]]>Minimum Viable Management
In this episode, Mike and Neha are joined by Denise, an engineering leader and former colleague from GitHub and Pivotal, to unpack the reality of workplace politics and why ignoring them is not a neutral choice. Drawing on Denise’s LeadDev talk and hard-earned lessons from management and senior IC roles, the conversation explores political capital, information asymmetry, allyship and the idea of “table flips” as a finite currency.
Together they discuss when to spend influence, when to hold it back and how privilege shapes who gets heard. From advocating for promotions to using power responsibly on the way out of an organisation, this is a practical and candid look at how to navigate work under capitalism without burning out or selling yourself short.
]]>Minimum Viable Management
Product, design and engineering rarely agree and that’s a good thing. In this episode, Mike McQuaid and Neha Batra break down what healthy tension actually looks like, why alignment is overrated and how leaders can turn disagreement into better outcomes.
]]>I don’t have analytics for this blog. I have no idea how many people read it or why they read it. As I care about backwards compatibility, a blog post is the only reliable way to communicate changes to subscribers.
As a result of leaning more into POSSE, on this site I’ve made a few changes:
/thoughtsmikemcquaid.com to be all recent Articles, Thoughts, Talks, Interviews and podcasts./articles for all Articles instead./atom.xml to publish all homepage content.If you’re interested in the technical side, you can see what I did on GitHub. Given we’re in 2025, yes, I leaned pretty heavily on OpenAI Codex and ChatGPT for a lot of this. In the spirit of “vibe engineering” rather than “vibe coding”, I reviewed and edited all the code by hand.
TL;DR: Subscribe to /all.xml for the all-content feed.
If you want Articles only, subscribe to /articles.xml.
Thanks for reading this blog ❤️. It will be 20 years old in 2026 and it’s nice to see the current blogging resurgence.
]]>The short answer is the project management triangle, commonly summarised as:
Good, fast, cheap. Choose two.
My software version is slightly different. Instead I’d say:
High quality, full scope, delivery date. Choose two.
Let’s break this down:
This is normally the first to get compromised when engineers are pushed to “work faster”. The compromise is often silent because any bugs or declining code quality are not immediately obvious to the consumer. Constant compromise on quality results in bad software that eventually kills software companies.
Of course, the flip side is that some software engineers will endlessly polish code if given the chance. This is why “high quality” has to be the goal, not perfection.
The “scope” of a software project is generally “how many different use cases do we build this for”. For a feature to be everything to everyone: that will take longer.
This can be seen as a “product (manager) decision” instead of a “software (engineer) decision” but it must be a negotiation. There may be things the product manager or customer added to the scope thinking they would take a day but actually take a month. With open, supportive and respectful communication, a lot of scope can often be cut and a lot of time saved.
Software engineers hate inflexible “deadlines”. This is because there are many hidden complexities of software estimation. Most of the time, though, organisations need to know when they can rely on some software being delivered. This becomes a problem only when there’s no wiggle room on quality or scope.
This is also why engineers pad their estimates. “Estimates” are too often treated as “deadlines”. Padding estimates actually makes a lot of sense in low trust/high stakes environments, or with a lot of uncertainty around the work. Good engineers will use the “extra time”, if they have any, to improve quality or scope.
High quality, full scope, delivery date. Choose two.
Remember and quote this when asked to deliver all three.
The only way to not have two is demanding all three (and usually ending up with one or zero).
Good luck!
]]>Minimum Viable Management
Mike and Neha explore how leaders can recognise when things are going wrong, why admitting mistakes builds trust, how to spot low psychological safety, and the value of written plans, accountability and steady course correction when guiding teams through tough moments.
]]>Minimum Viable Management
Mike McQuaid and Neha Batra break down how leaders spark momentum and keep it steady. They start with clarity of mission, ruthless scope cuts, and visible wins in weeks not years. They cover simple not easy systems that reduce drag, like milestone slices, anti-goals, handoffs that follow the sun, and temporary process as guardrails you later remove. They show why constraints breed creativity, how to automate recurring pain, and why teams should target low volatility over peak velocity. They close with saying no, letting the right fires burn, and building a candid culture through trust and social capital.
]]>Most people overestimate what they can do in one year and underestimate what they can do in ten years.
Bill Gates wrote this in 1996 but it’s been attributed to many others before him.
Build health habits today that lead to a great body in 10 years.
Build social habits today that lead to great relationships in 10 years.
Build learning habits today that lead to great knowledge in 10 years.
Long-term thinking is a secret weapon.
“Aim to be great in 10 years”, James Clear.
I’ve lived in Scotland for 39 years. Most of my education was here; my friends and family are here too.
I’ve been friends with my best friend for 30 years. He comes around to my house weekly to watch sci-fi with me (that my wife would rather not).
I’ve been with my wife for 23 years. We have, in my opinion, a perfect marriage.
I’ve maintained Homebrew for 16 years. It’s still fun and used by millions.
I spent 10 years working for GitHub, from “engineer” to “principal engineer”. I left with lots of knowledge, friends, fun and, frankly, money.
I’ve been powerlifting for 7 years. I’m the “Scottish Masters 1” Champion (out of an admittedly small pool) and continue to improve.
That doesn’t mean sticking with everything.
I quit Christianity after 20 years when it stopped fitting my values.
I quit GitHub after 10 years when I stopped learning.
I used to practice music for hours daily and play in public weekly, but have barely played in years.
I’ve quit jobs, projects and friendships that stopped making me or those around me happy.
Long-term thinking matters, but so does quitting at the right time.
None of the above was easy. There was sadness along the way, as there is for everyone. All of it enriched my life and the lives of the people around me.
None of the above would have happened if I’d been obsessed with finding the perfect option. My choices will not be the right ones for you. I’ve been lucky, have different preferences and needs.
You could decide tomorrow to try one of the above (and you might love it). Good luck finding what your happy long time looks like, wherever you are today. I hope to see you still enjoying it 10 or 20 years from now.
]]>Minimum Viable Management
How can teams feel safe to speak up while still hearing hard truths? In this episode of Minimum Viable Management, Mike McQuaid and Neha Batra explore what it really means to balance psychological safety with direct, honest communication. They discuss the practical work of rebuilding trust in teams, the role of consistency and humility in leadership, and how to make openness a habit, even when conversations are uncomfortable.
They also touch on remote work, written communication, and when individual contributors should share their opinions in decision-making. A candid look at how safety and honesty can, and must, coexist for teams to thrive.
]]>