Should a development manager authorize a blank card to select a platform and language?

Question

I am a development manager in a small house with software products that are primarily written in Java, and many Java-related web technologies and frameworks (an odd bit of C ++ when we need something lower).

When one of the developers comes to me and says: "I want to bring down the internal tool in the Perl / Python / Ruby / Visual Basic / Fortran / 6800 Assembler (basically nothing that is not on our main list of technologies)", the immediate answer is that I don’t want what we cannot support when this person leaves - internal tools have a way to become critical, and you should be able to support them regardless of a particular person.

My opinion is that it’s not as if I asked them to write a web application in C, our main list of technologies contains, as a rule, tools that are suitable for the work in question (if maybe not as good as some alternatives) but how strictly should standards be applied in these situations?

(Marker as a wiki community, because I know that this is subjective - although not, I hope to argue - but I'm sure that people will close if they consider it unreasonable).

Answer 1

, , . "" (, "" ). ( , - , ). , , : .

, , . , : , . Ruby , , , , (, , .) ( !), . - else ( ): , .

Answer 2

, , .

, - , , , , , . , , ?

( !) "" , "" . .

: , , , , . Python Django, Ruby Rails, . , Java. .

, , , , , , 100% .

- . , . . " , , - , - , , , Java, , ? groupthink, , ?"

:

. "" Visual Basic # , Java JVM .net. .net , , Java JVM , .

II. "" Ruby Python, , , . - .

III. , , , , . -, Java? . -, , , , Python Ruby? "" ? .

IV. , "" Java, . , Python Ruby , " , Java Java", , Java.