What makes a piece of software enterprise-ready?

Being free as in freedom.

Extreme complexity and obtuse design so the enterprise has to keep paying their existing developers to maintain it, since no one else will understand it, and those developers will be protected from the retarded decisions of outsourced pajeets.

Not being shit and thrown together in a month or less.

>>61779514

it has to take 20 minutes to start up

>>61779514
Scalable, able to run for months without crashing, draconic licensing terms, vendor you can blame if things go wrong.

Abstract Factory Factories

>>61779514
Pajeet flooded

>>61779812
Obviously, how else would you have time to make yourself a coffe?

>>61779514
It has to be proprietary spaghetti code garbage that survives purely off its monopoly on training. If all of the college students only know how to use YOUR software then you have guaranteed sales for the next few generations. The MS Office suite is a perfect example of this. Nobody uses Office because they've checked out all of the alternatives and settles on what suites them, they use it because they literally have to if they want to stay employed. This is why free software alternatives to mainstream software will never gain popularity outside of enthusiast communities.

File: 1493521760007.png (21KB, 470x387px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 470x387px

>>61779514
Functionality + one of the other two (not both).

>>61779514
Whether it has a remote code execution vulnerability that can wipe out an entire continent that nobody patches because of muh management

I want to bite that foot.

>>61780586
But that's not the conjoined triangle of success, anon...

having tag >= 1.0.0

>>61779514
Written entirely in java and randomly breaks. Also super obscure user interface only usable with even more obscure keyboard shortcuts.

>>61779514
Approval by Starfleet Engineering Corps.