• JippenFaddoul (unregistered)

    Who needs testing if it compiles? o.O

  • dave (unregistered) in reply to JippenFaddoul
    JippenFaddoul:
    Who needs testing if it compiles? o.O

    I thought that was testing. Maybe that's what I've been doing wrong all these years.

  • (cs)

    Why deploy? just code directly on the server!

  • Mark Z (unregistered) in reply to Grovesy

    That's exactly what my new manager does. He writes the jsp directly on the QA server and scopy them on the production one. Why bothering with ide, test environment and version control?

  • (cs) in reply to Grovesy

    Not long before I started at my current company, they didn't have source control. They just moved files from their PC to the web server. A few months before I started, they started using source control, but still just pushed files out to the server.

    Now they're getting to the point where they actually have a QA server to test on and establishing procedures so that no developer just pushes to production.

  • diaphanein (unregistered)

    It's java - not like it's going to work (well) anyways. Real programmers write websites in C (no, I didn't mean C#). And they write the code from their blackberries.

  • Rich (unregistered) in reply to JippenFaddoul

    Exactly. If it compiles, ship it.

  • POS TRAINING (unregistered) in reply to diaphanein
    diaphanein:
    It's java - not like it's going to work (well) anyways. Real programmers write websites in C (no, I didn't mean C#). And they write the code from their blackberries.

    strawberries are better

  • Ken B (unregistered) in reply to diaphanein
    diaphanein:
    It's java - not like it's going to work (well) anyways. Real programmers write websites in C (no, I didn't mean C#). And they write the code from their blackberries.
    I remember a "real programmers DSW" some time ago. It started with the usual "real programmers use EDLIN" and "real programmers use 'cat >filename'", and so on. But, it continued until it got to "real programmers use a magnetized needle to encode the data directly onto the HD platter", and finished with "real programmers expose the platter to cosmic rays to encode the data".
  • Bob from Toronto (unregistered) in reply to diaphanein
    diaphanein:
    It's java - not like it's going to work (well) anyways. Real programmers write websites in C (no, I didn't mean C#). And they write the code from their blackberries.

    Stop with this "real programmer" crap! Randall wrote the last word on it, ok? real programmers set universal constants so the universe evolves top contain the disc with the data they want. End of story.

    http://xkcd.com/378/

  • (cs) in reply to diaphanein
    diaphanein:
    It's java - not like it's going to work (well) anyways. Real programmers write websites in C (no, I didn't mean C#). And they write the code from their blackberries.
    Blackberries? Ha! I remember writing code on my programmable Casio calculator!

    Rookie!

  • (cs) in reply to snoofle

    Well... Thats normal extreme programming...

    Utilizing a short feedback loop in order to deliver better and working software...

    Never underestimate the amount of testers you gain when you deploy right onto production!

  • Matt C (unregistered) in reply to Ken B

    http://www.xkcd.com/378/

  • Anonymous Cow-herd (unregistered) in reply to diaphanein
    diaphanein:
    It's java - not like it's going to work (well) anyways. Real programmers write websites in C (no, I didn't mean C#). And they write the code from their blackberries.

    No, real programmers write websites in black ink, make changes in red ink, and then when they're done they dial into the server and whistle the contents into the telephone.

  • Anonymous (unregistered) in reply to snoofle
    snoofle:
    diaphanein:
    It's java - not like it's going to work (well) anyways. Real programmers write websites in C (no, I didn't mean C#). And they write the code from their blackberries.
    Blackberries? Ha! I remember writing code on my programmable Casio calculator!

    Rookie!

    Casio? Amateur. Real geeks use HP calculators, and program in assembly language by exploiting bugs in the RPL interpreters.

  • Alfred (unregistered) in reply to Matt C

    I'd like to use that to flip the "allow root login" bit and the password hash bits on Verisign's key server. Does EMACS have that option?

  • MentalImage (unregistered)

    I've got a vivid mental image of :

    Mr. Bronson shouting "Daaavvve"! ("Kendallll"!) Closeup of Dave (I've substituted the head of John R. General Manager at StartLogic for Dave, as I don't know what Dave looks like) And then the Grange Hill #duh-dit-dah-down# music as Dave realises what he's done...

  • (cs) in reply to Anonymous
    Anonymous:
    Casio? Amateur. Real geeks use HP calculators, and program in assembly language by exploiting bugs in the RPL interpreters.
    Real geeks don't waste time on toys.
  • (cs) in reply to Anonymous
    Anonymous:
    snoofle:
    diaphanein:
    It's java - not like it's going to work (well) anyways. Real programmers write websites in C (no, I didn't mean C#). And they write the code from their blackberries.
    Blackberries? Ha! I remember writing code on my programmable Casio calculator!

    Rookie!

    Casio? Amateur. Real geeks use HP calculators, and program in assembly language by exploiting bugs in the RPL interpreters.

    Piffle. Real programmers do their taxes in hexadecimal.

  • (cs)

    This wouldn't have happened if they had not given Dave the shingle for the production server.

  • (cs) in reply to FredSaw
    FredSaw:
    Real programmers do their taxes in hexadecimal.
    Evidence from yesterday indicates that they do it in base-13…
  • Cronan (unregistered) in reply to Grovesy
    Grovesy:
    Why deploy? just code directly on the server!
    Why code on the server? Use a magnet to change the bits on the hard-drive directly!
  • helix (unregistered)

    hey those quotes remind me of that XKCD online comic i read:

    http://www.xkcd.com/378/

  • (cs) in reply to FredSaw
    Piffle. Real programmers do their taxes in hexadecimal.
    Octal, surely?

    EDIT: why did it eat the quote I put in? o.O

  • (cs)

    Hey, this reminds me of that one xkcd comic where...

    I'm beginning to support MasterPlanSoftware's ban on xkcd references. We've all read them before, especially that one.

    On topic, I submit that this in not actually a WTF for the following reasons:

    1. Everyone makes mistakes, especially the new guy. If management sees fit to give this guy access to the production server on his first day, they should expect things like this to happen.

    2. They actually have a QA server.

    3. The developer admits that this code needs to be tested.

    4. Apparently, this guy's code actually worked.

    Basically, this is an anti-WTF.

  • grg (unregistered)

    In the old Strategic Air Command they had to run a full attack run-through with real nuclear weapons twice a year.

    One B-58 pilot was concentrating on their simulated bombing of Chicago, carefully following his checklist, when the Navigator/Bommbardier asked over the intercom: "Anybody have a tool I can use to cut this safety wire?" It seems he was following his checklist a little bit TOO closely and wanted to flip the "Arm bomb drop" lever, which is normally safety-wired into the OFF position. When chastised for this later on he just reiterated that they're told over and over to follow the checklist.

  • (cs) in reply to Outlaw Programmer
    Outlaw Programmer:
    Basically, this is an anti-WTF.
    Mostly agreed. The two WTFs are:
    1. Management had the new guy doing updates to the production server on his first day without any supervision.
    2. The new guy didn't stop to think about the reason for having a QA server and a deployment server.

    But it would have been much more fun if the upshot of this had been the loss of a few million bucks in missed business. A problem that was cleared in minutes with minimal cost and where things largely worked anyway… not a WTF to write home about.

  • Gbo Bluth (unregistered)

    The real WTF, as always, is that i actually read all these comments.

  • Evil Code Monkey (unregistered) in reply to grg
    grg:
    When chastised for this later on he just reiterated that they're told over and over to follow the checklist.

    That's actually true. In the military they emphasize following the checklist, because in many cases not following the checklist can have serious repercussions, including death of the operator.

    In that case the WTF is that management gave the bombardier the production checklist, instead of the QA checklist.

    Or does SAC test in production also?

  • (cs) in reply to grg
    grg:
    In the old Strategic Air Command they had to run a full attack run-through with real nuclear weapons twice a year.

    One B-58 pilot was concentrating on their simulated bombing of Chicago, carefully following his checklist, when the Navigator/Bommbardier asked over the intercom: "Anybody have a tool I can use to cut this safety wire?" It seems he was following his checklist a little bit TOO closely and wanted to flip the "Arm bomb drop" lever, which is normally safety-wired into the OFF position. When chastised for this later on he just reiterated that they're told over and over to follow the checklist.

    When my Dad was in the army, stationed at Fort Dix, they used to roll out the big guns for targeting practice. Since there weren't a whole lot of enemy aircraft flying near Fort Dix, they used to track commercial jets.

    One night, it had rained extremely heavily. The next morning, they were tracking some commercial jet, when someone (not my Dad) fired the gun. Fortunately, the very heavy installation mount had sunk into the mud a bit, so the targeting was off.

    Said the guy who hit the trigger: "But I was told to follow the firing procedure, Sir!"

  • Walleye (unregistered) in reply to dkf
    dkf:
    FredSaw:
    Real programmers do their taxes in hexadecimal.
    Evidence from yesterday indicates that they do it in base-13…
    True, but they'll be using hexadecimal in 2011.
  • Charles (unregistered)

    At my company, the SOX (Sarbanes Oxley) auditors would be all over the manager of the Development Manager for a lack of adequate controls. "What do you mean, Development has access to update production code?" Then it would get written up, sent all the way up the chain to the board of directors back at corporate HQ.

    CAPTCHA is facilisi? How olitically incorrect for anyone with ED! I'm going to notify my SOX auditor!!

  • (cs) in reply to snoofle
    snoofle:
    grg:
    In the old Strategic Air Command they had to run a full attack run-through with real nuclear weapons twice a year.

    One B-58 pilot was concentrating on their simulated bombing of Chicago, carefully following his checklist, when the Navigator/Bommbardier asked over the intercom: "Anybody have a tool I can use to cut this safety wire?" It seems he was following his checklist a little bit TOO closely and wanted to flip the "Arm bomb drop" lever, which is normally safety-wired into the OFF position. When chastised for this later on he just reiterated that they're told over and over to follow the checklist.

    When my Dad was in the army, stationed at Fort Dix, they used to roll out the big guns for targeting practice. Since there weren't a whole lot of enemy aircraft flying near Fort Dix, they used to track commercial jets.

    One night, it had rained extremely heavily. The next morning, they were tracking some commercial jet, when someone (not my Dad) fired the gun. Fortunately, the very heavy installation mount had sunk into the mud a bit, so the targeting was off.

    Said the guy who hit the trigger: "But I was told to follow the firing procedure, Sir!"

    I really, seriously, wish I could believe that this is an imaginary WTF.

    The sad thing is that I suspect that the Specialist (Third Class) Artillery guy in question was posted to the Gulf just before that Iranian civilian airliner was shot down.

  • Mr. Eff (unregistered) in reply to Grovesy
    Grovesy:
    Why deploy? just code directly on the server!

    You must be a Sharepoint developer!

  • (cs) in reply to dkf
    dkf:
    Outlaw Programmer:
    Basically, this is an anti-WTF.
    2) The new guy didn't stop to think about the reason for having a QA server and a deployment server.

    I'm still on the fence about this one. It's probably a WTF, but I can see a case where they basically just hand him a poorly written doc that says "First, upload to SRV2830QA, then upload to SRV7272PROD". If it was his first job out of school, he may not have realized that there are differently layers.

    So yeah, he shouldn't have blindly followed orders, but it goes back to the fact that they should have held this guy's hand a little bit more on his first day.

  • Anonymous Cow-herd (unregistered) in reply to helix
    helix:
    hey those quotes remind me of that XKCD online comic i read:

    http://www.xkcd.com/378/

    Elsewhere on the Internets, the response would be along the lines of "slowpoke.jpg". Here, that image would be printed out mounted on a wooden table and photographed, said photograph scanned, printed out, mounted on a wooden table and photographed ... etc.

  • Bobbo (unregistered) in reply to MentalImage
    MentalImage:
    I've got a vivid mental image of :

    Mr. Bronson shouting "Daaavvve"! ("Kendallll"!) Closeup of Dave (I've substituted the head of John R. General Manager at StartLogic for Dave, as I don't know what Dave looks like) And then the Grange Hill #duh-dit-dah-down# music as Dave realises what he's done...

    Ahh, the memories! Does Mr Bronson's wig come loose shortly after?

  • Man 987876980 (unregistered) in reply to Outlaw Programmer
    Outlaw Programmer:
    I'm beginning to support MasterPlanSoftware's ban on xkcd references.
    I agree, except you should see this one: http://www.xkcd.com/378/
  • Mark (unregistered) in reply to grg
    One B-58 pilot was concentrating on their simulated bombing of Chicago, carefully following his checklist, when the Navigator/Bommbardier asked over the intercom: "Anybody have a tool I can use to cut this safety wire?" It seems he was following his checklist a little bit TOO closely and wanted to flip the "Arm bomb drop" lever, which is normally safety-wired into the OFF position. When chastised for this later on he just reiterated that they're told over and over to follow the checklist.

    Did they then provide a pair of wirecutters as standard equipment? If he had to ask for them, doesn't that mean if the nuclear attack goes production, the Arm Bomb Drop feature wouldn't work?

  • (cs) in reply to Mr. Eff
    Mr. Eff:
    Grovesy:
    Why deploy? just code directly on the server!

    You must be a Sharepoint developer!

    Saddly not, retail developer... as much as you try and drum into the business 'process' and protecting the thing that makes you a few hundred million a year they still force through 1/2 finished features to 'get it out there and get feedback'...

    Nothing like an out of action site loosing millions by the hour to focus your mind on why ohh why you accepted another contract in this industry.

  • anescient (unregistered) in reply to Grovesy

    To deploy server onto production

    1. File -> Save
  • Mike (unregistered) in reply to Outlaw Programmer

    I disagree. This is the once-in-a-lifetime WTF that doesn't hurt. As they say sometimes on NASCAR broadcasts when a guy almost loses control of the car but saves it: "He wrecked, he just didn't hit anything."

    TRWTF is giving someone in development access to the production servers -- ESPECIALLY on his first day. There should be someone else on the QA team who is the QA Manager's backup, not someone from the development team.

  • grg (unregistered) in reply to Mark

    Safety wire is like 0.020 inch steel wire, twist-tied about five turns. Lots of levers get safety-wired OFF or ON. In actual combat conditions you have so much adrenalin you can flip those switches without even noticing the safety wire unraveling.

  • zredfqsdfqsdfqsdf (unregistered) in reply to Outlaw Programmer
    Outlaw Programmer:
    3) The developer admits that this code needs to be tested.
    1. Apparently, this guy's code actually worked.

    Basically, this is an anti-WTF.

    The developer admits that fully testing it all would take a week but still decided that everything was ok after some 'panicked smoke testing in production'...

  • (cs) in reply to Mike
    Mike:
    TRWTF is giving someone in development access to the production servers -- ESPECIALLY on his first day. There should be someone else on the QA team who is the QA Manager's backup, not someone from the development team.

    I agree. I think there should have been separate checklists to begin with. The development team would get the checklist to push it to the QA server (gee, why not have a script).

    The QA manager should push it to production once it is verified. If the QA manager is out of town, unless it is emergency, deployment to production should be postponed til he returns.

  • D-Coder (unregistered) in reply to Alfred
    Alfred:
    I'd like to use that to flip the "allow root login" bit and the password hash bits on Verisign's key server. Does EMACS have that option?

    Of course it does. I wrote it just for you, ESC-x verisign-allow-root-login.

    I haven't tested it yet, though, I just pushed it onto the server for you.

  • (cs) in reply to Mike
    Mike:
    TRWTF is giving someone in development access to the production servers -- ESPECIALLY on his first day.
    Well this first bit is not really a WTF really in my book in general normal situations.
    Mike:
    There should be someone else on the QA team who is the QA Manager's backup, not someone from the development team.
    But this second bit is right on. At least someone with some knowledge of their processes should have worked with the new lead on this.
  • (cs) in reply to D-Coder
    D-Coder:
    Alfred:
    I'd like to use that to flip the "allow root login" bit and the password hash bits on Verisign's key server. Does EMACS have that option?

    Of course it does. I wrote it just for you, ESC-x verisign-allow-root-login.

    I haven't tested it yet, though, I just pushed it onto the server for you.

    What server? Where? We need this option.

    Damn. I'll just have to write it for myself.

  • (cs) in reply to Grovesy
    Grovesy:
    Mr. Eff:
    Grovesy:
    Why deploy? just code directly on the server!

    You must be a Sharepoint developer!

    Saddly not, retail developer... as much as you try and drum into the business 'process' and protecting the thing that makes you a few hundred million a year they still force through 1/2 finished features to 'get it out there and get feedback'...

    Nothing like an out of action site loosing millions by the hour to focus your mind on why ohh why you accepted another contract in this industry.

    You're English, aren't you?

  • Reaper (unregistered)

    QA 2.0 users do the tests companies just deploy and get paid

Leave a comment on “Application Lifecycle Mismanagement”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

Log Out

« Return to Article