• (disco)

    Fristly, I don't care about the Discourse "feature" about unlisted topics. I know it is an ongoing feature for quite a while already, but I don't care.

    All I care about is this: [image]

  • (disco) in reply to Anonymous

    The site should really stop counting the PaulaBean comments... It says 3 comments even though there is only one really.

  • (disco) in reply to sinni800

    But counting them is easier than not counting them.

  • (disco) in reply to aliceif
    aliceif:
    But counting them is easier than not counting them

    NumberOfComments - 2

    Replacing one WTF with an other.

  • (disco) in reply to Anonymous
    Anonymous:
    Fristly, I don't care about the Discourse "feature" about unlisted topics. I know it is an ongoing feature for quite a while already, but I don't care.

    I wonder though how you get to an unlisted thread (or better, how to learn what URI it's at) - it seems PaulaBean's profile no longer shows unlisted threads, so the DiscoDevs at least covered that hole.

    Also TRWTF: Snoofle saving the day, preventing further WTFs from happening.   :interrobang:

  • (disco) in reply to Luhmann

    On a similar line, I once worked under a terrible micro-manager who insisted that if a larger task wasn't broken down into 2 hour chunks then it wasn't broken down far enough.

    He'd sit at his desk monitoring the source control and the bug tracking system watching for check-ins and status updates to make sure everyone was progressing and would call your in for a meeting if you didn't meet his 4 status updates per day target.

  • (disco)

    TRWTF is that not only do they even have five levels of management, but that that's not all of them.

  • (disco)

    "When I pointed out the folly of all of this, they told me that the boss four levels up had experienced massive problems with multiple projects under his control, and decided that a single source tree would only need to be fixed once and would thus improve throughput."

    Sounds smart! Maybe they should also put everything in a single function. That way only one function needs to be fixed on a bug.

  • (disco)

    I agree there needs to be separation and independence, but (partially depending on SCVM being used) don't see why there is a need for separate repositories. In fact, for some systems, a single repository with all of the companies technical IP is the recommended approach (and I am talking LARGE organizations).

    So, if access is controlled, relevant "limbs" of the tree are independent (e.g. can be built independently, versioned, branched, etc.) where is the WTF?

  • (disco) in reply to TheCPUWizard

    Having one tree in revision control can make some sense (perhaps more so with svn than git) but having one build tree for several unrelated products is strange and a bad idea. Splitting the build is absolutely sensible, and the WTF is that the people inside TFA's setup never thought of this (or pushed to get it sorted out).

  • (disco) in reply to sinni800

    Anyone know if the article page says "Preview top 1 comments" when Paula's is the only one? That would be pretty funny.

    Also, the "B" and "I" buttons on this thing are retarded. Why give them a tooltip that suggests it inserts HTML and then insert some other crap that doesn't work when part of a word? The keyboard shortcut written right next to "what it does" does the same thing as clicking too.

  • (disco) in reply to TheCPUWizard
    Comment held for moderation.
  • (disco) in reply to TheCPUWizard

    OK, how about speed? When you start working on project1 and only in that project but now you have to download 20GB of project1...n. Yeah, that sounds reasonable.

    How about history? Again, you're working in project1 but to find any kind of useful information regarding this project, you have to filter out all the unrelated history/logs/blames from 100 other projects. Very reasonable, and add that each time you issue a logs command, it will take ages.

    How about fuck-ups? Now, Mike VP of HR decided to have his own folder in this magical thing called "code repository". He's a VP, so no saying no to him. Now your repo is full of word and excel documents from HR. Yeah! Great idea.

    I don't know if I have to add some irony tag somewhere.

  • (disco)
    Comment held for moderation.
  • (disco) in reply to Eldelshell
    1. Who ever gets the entire repository? The project I am working on right now has a 1TB+ source repository. Most developers can only see about 5% of this, and then only get 5% of what they can see to work on a given item...

    2. Who ever looks at the history of the entire repository? Find the root node that contains all of the information you are interested in and then look at the history of that!

    3. Saying NO to a VP should not be difficult, if there is proper empowerment and responsibility given to those in charge [yes, this is hard, but not impossible]

  • (disco) in reply to TheCPUWizard
    TheCPUWizard:
    Who ever gets the entire repository? The project I am working on right now has a 1TB+ source repository. Most developers can only see about 5% of this, and then only get 5% of what they can see to work on a given item...

    I don't understand. How, if your source repo has 1TB (mindblown btw) is it possible to checkout different parts of it. Unless you're using something like SVN modules which is somehow a separation by itself and not what the article is suggesting.

  • (disco) in reply to TheCPUWizard
    TheCPUWizard:
    1TB+ source repository

    There are more efficient ways to program the entire universe, you know.

  • (disco) in reply to Eldelshell
    Comment held for moderation.
  • (disco)

    snoofle sure has a real fascination with strikethrough.

  • (disco)

    Had to find this article comment page on the forum site.

    The through link didn't work.

    [image]
  • (disco) in reply to xaade

    I'd assume it's because Disco renders the url like this: its-easier-this-way

    Instead of how TDWTF renders it (more correct): it-s-easier-this-way

    Especially since there's a clear difference between its and it's

  • (disco) in reply to tin
    Comment held for moderation.
  • (disco) in reply to chubertdev
    Comment held for moderation.
  • (disco) in reply to xaade

    Nope - I tried both ways and got an error page.

  • (disco) in reply to TheCPUWizard
    Comment held for moderation.
  • (disco) in reply to DaveK
    DaveK:
    TRWTF is that not only do they even *have* five levels of management, but that *that's not all of them*.

    And that's relative to one of the more senior developers. I'm guessing this is one of the older Fortune 500 companies (or the Pentagon, if "beating the competition to market" actually means "beating the competition on the battlefield") and that boss5 is either a Vice-President or a five-star general/admiral. Still, grats to snoofle for standing up to boss4 when he was already in his industry of choice.

  • (disco) in reply to Seahen
    Seahen:
    Pentagon, ... boss5 is either a Vice-President or a five-star general/admiral.
    There are no five-star generals or admirals in the US military.

    General of the Army, in its modern usage as a five-star rank, has been awarded only during wartime (although the rank was retained following the end of the war), specifically WWII, and only five men have ever held this rank1. General of the Air Force has been held by only a single man, Henry "Hap" Arnold, one of the five modern Generals of the Army, when the Air Force was split into a separate service in 1947. Fleet Admiral was a five-star rank in the US Navy, granted to four men during WWII, but has not been authorized for use since then.

    1An earlier General of the Army rank was held (as a four-star rank) by Ulysses S. Grant following the Civil War, then by William Sherman (who changed the insignia to be two stars with the US coat of arms between them), then by Philip Sheridan. A higher rank, General of the Armies (plural) has been held only by John J. Pershing and George Washington (posthumously, awarded in 1976).

  • (disco)

    I've worked in a TFS shop where the 'repository' was basically just the contents of the 'development' file server dumped into TFS, with a "Personal Folders" folder and several copy'n'pasted duplicates of the 'main' source tree. Each dev had a 'branch' which was totally unique to them - come build time, they would email their changes to the deployment manager who would then try to assemble them on the staging server.

    This was an improvement over their previous SourceSafe repository, which they just didn't use, in favour of editing ASP files directly on the servers. Source control for the newer .NET components consisted of finding the relevant laptop.

  • (disco) in reply to HardwareGeek
    HardwareGeek:
    There are no five-star generals or admirals in the US military.

    What are your thoughts about Yorkshire pudding?

  • (disco)

    However, this one struck me as sooo wtf that I'm not even going to try to anonymize it.

    So, the projects at this company are literally called srcproject1, srcproject2, and srcproject3? Because I couldn't find any other info in the article suitable for anonymization, so I'm not sure what else that statement could have referred to.

  • (disco) in reply to boomzilla
    boomzilla:
    What are your thoughts about Yorkshire pudding?

    It's batter than nothing.

  • (disco) in reply to dkf
    dkf:
    It's batter than nothing.

    The awful puns thread is :left_luggage: :arrow_upper_right: :arrows_clockwise: somewhere.

  • (disco) in reply to boomzilla
    boomzilla:
    What are your thoughts about Yorkshire pudding?

    My initial thought was, "Wat? Non sequitur." My second thought would have been inappropriate had I posted it; a bit of research revealed that, never having had either, I had confused "Yorkshire pudding" with "black pudding." Having resolved that confusion, my final thought is that Yorkshire pudding is not as unappealing as I thought it was.

  • (disco) in reply to HardwareGeek

    Waiting to see if someone gets it. No one has yet...

  • (disco) in reply to HardwareGeek
    Comment held for moderation.
  • (disco) in reply to boomzilla
    boomzilla:
    Waiting to see if someone gets it. No one has yet...

    You seem to be saying this as if it were a good thing.

  • (disco) in reply to antiquarian
    antiquarian:
    You seem to be saying this as if it were a good thing.

    Inasmuch as I get entertainment from this, yes.

  • (disco) in reply to boomzilla
    boomzilla:
    Waiting to see if someone gets it. No one has yet...

    Does that mean we all get badgers?

  • (disco) in reply to HardwareGeek
    HardwareGeek:
    black pudding

    Nice.

    There are many different types of black pudding, and I've yet to encounter one I didn't like. However… the Spanish one is a flavouring ingredient that belongs in a stew, and is not a part of a fry-up.

Leave a comment on “It's Easier This Way”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

« Return to Article