The system I'm working on started as a small training project within the company I work for but quickly caught interest from management as a means to help to standardize the existing excel-heavy workflows. I'm one of the lead developers on the project, despite having no lead experience prior and only being in my third year as a software engineer (NOTE: this is my first professional project).
I recently used the strategy pattern to write a validator to handle different possible validation tasks for a given object (working in Java with Spring Boot currently). My goal was to make it easy to add new validations without risking affecting other parts of the code and make it easy for other members to extend it. I thought this was a good approach, until I told my manager. He said he doesn't want new logic to be written each time there are new validation paths because he doesn't want to do an official release each time we have logic changes (we have no DevOps pipeline, Kubernetes, etc. due to IT department restrictions, so everything deployment-wise is manual at this point). He wants everything to be configurable to the point that no additional logic is needed or housed in the RDBMS so that we can just insert new records into some table or modify a stored procedure/function and call it a day. He also claims this will reduce complexity for new members.
Personally, this seems like a poor design decision. Moving everything to SQL is going to add more complexity over time, even if in the short-term things work out. Also, SQL - while powerful when it comes to data querying/organizing - doesn't seem all that great when you have to write tons of cases to account for different validation rules, etc.
Are my concerns with my manager's approach justified, or is he correct?
I wanted to provide additional context to the validation process mentioned in the above post. The part of the application that handles the validation is new. Right now, most of the company's core data housing and management is in countless Excel sheets. Upper management has expressed a desire to move away from Excel, particularly to streamline some of the more tedious internal processes. As a part of this, one of the departments is attempting to standardize the available options in their existing excel-heavy process (previously, all of the options were free-form text fields). At the moment, not all options have been standardized, but each needs a series of validation checks if chosen. So far, they've been straightforward and amounted to various equivalence checks. However, I don't know if that precedent will hold over time because neither I nor my manager are familiar with this department and all of its processes.