• (disco)

    because a tool like this is useful without some sort of reporting system.

    Did you leave out a not, or am I failing to detect some intended sarcasm?

    Also, ssrs.jpg is 404ing.

  • (disco)

    Maciek

    Whew, not me! Though things like

    If the invoice went out to a customer on a Monday, the field should be green, but if it went out the second Thursday of the month, it should be red, but black if it was any other day, except for Wednesdays, which should always be yellow unless they fall on an odd numbered calendar day or it’s a leap year.

    are eerily familiar...

  • (disco)

    What's with the initial warning about names containing Enterprise, while none of the products in the article actually have such a name?

  • (disco) in reply to Maciejasjmj
    Maciejasjmj:
    not me!

    I was just glad they didn't include Royal Purple and Deep Indigo, then I would know it was us for- Eh. erm, yeah, sorry, just got an IP strike from InfoSec, paynoattentiontome.

  • (disco)

    I don't get what the real WTF is here - is it the co-worker not replying to the "test this" mail or is it the code that lets the report error when there's too much data?

    Either way: While entertaining (especially for me who has to develop for Dynamics NAV frequently) it is still confusing and not consistent.

  • (disco)

    I suspect there may be some exaggeration around Vlad's behaviour, but I do feel Maciek's pain of people who consistently prove themselves incapable of entering the test / verification dialogue via e.g. email with the developer assigned to attend to their changes.

    The question is to be asked: how often does one follow up on emails which one has sent but not received a reply to? I have on occasion wondered whether to investigate whether Outlook offers a tool which allows you to set a warning flag on any particular email that hasn't been replied to within a time that you may configure, but I am rarely the one who suffers pain from the required amendments not having been implemented. If the respondent does not reply within an adequate time to my emails, they are the ones who are viewed with disfavour.

  • (disco)
  • (disco) in reply to Tsaukpaetra

    I think that's because Remy simplified the rules a bit. I know for a fact he left out the parts describing:

    • Full moon
    • New moon
    • End of quarter
    • End of fiscal year.
  • (disco)

    // Record count is a good proxy for overall time on this // report. However, each record requires a significant amount // of processing and costly balance queries, so the limits // are set significantly lower for this report than other // reports. 100 records will take around 10 seconds to process // and 2500 records will take around 15 minutes to process.

    Used to take that long until Maciek's predecessor fixed the query and then ran screaming from the company -- I'm sure if I looked hard enough I could find that story here as well.

  • (disco)
  • (disco) in reply to Maciejasjmj

    Clearly Maciek is your successor, after evaluating Maciej++

  • (disco) in reply to Quite

    Lack of follow up not only happens with mails: our bug tracker provides the possibility to ask the reporter for more information and it happens that one doesn't get an update when asking for more info on an issue that has been marked as critical.

  • (disco) in reply to balu2005
    balu2005:
    I don't get what the real WTF is here - is it the co-worker not replying to the "test this" mail or is it the code that lets the report error when there's too much data?
    This is a pair of WTFs. The second, as you suggest, is the error in the report.

    The first is the developer who did a "fire and forget" on his request for validation, then wondered why the requester was upset that it wasn't in production. Always follow up this sort of request. Chase the email down the hall to the guy's desk if you have to.

    Oh, and never word it like that. "Can you confirm these reports are correct?" is all that is needed.

  • (disco) in reply to Quite
    Quite:
    I suspect there may be some exaggeration around Vlad's behaviour, but I do feel Maciek's pain of people who consistently prove themselves incapable of entering the test / verification dialogue via e.g. email with the developer assigned to attend to their changes.

    The question is to be asked: how often does one follow up on emails which one has sent but not received a reply to? I have on occasion wondered whether to investigate whether Outlook offers a tool which allows you to set a warning flag on any particular email that hasn't been replied to within a time that you may configure, but I am rarely the one who suffers pain from the required amendments not having been implemented. If the respondent does not reply within an adequate time to my emails, they are the ones who are viewed with disfavour.

    If you're using Outlook for email, then you can use other parts of Outlook to help you. There is this ubiquitous rumour that Outlook has a calendar function, and that this calendar function even works without an Exchange Server. Send the email, then create a meeting request for yourself to do the follow up.

    And set an effing alarm on it!

  • (disco) in reply to RFoxmich

    Not just that, but there's also the special rules for the end of the calendar year and the end of the audit year. Because one never correlated with the fiscal year anytime when the business existed, and the other used to correlate but now doesn't because of some weird dispute back in 1963…

  • (disco) in reply to RFoxmich

    There's also the

    • leap day that falls on a full moon
  • (disco)

    Maciek didn’t ask the users why this particular insane business rule existed, because they wouldn’t have explained it to him anyway.

    Probably because they didn't know but what they did know was that had to have it that way because "that's the way we've always done it"

  • (disco)

    Or maybe since the timeouts have been removed, no error message is shown, so Vlad is just sitting there waiting for the task to finish. and waiting. and waiting

  • (disco) in reply to Steve_The_Cynic
    Steve_The_Cynic:
    There is this ubiquitous rumour that Outlook has a calendar function, and that this calendar function even works without an Exchange Server. Send the email, then create a meeting request for yourself to do the follow up.

    While useful, that is not the same as the feature he was pondering. I'm not sure if you were suggesting the feature already exists, or offering a workaround.

  • (disco)

    I love how the good guy in the story is Polish and the bad guy is Russian.

  • (disco) in reply to Gaska

    I thought Vlad was Transylvanian? :stuck_out_tongue_closed_eyes:

  • (disco) in reply to dcon
    dcon:
    There's also the * leap day that falls on a full moon

    Poking around the Web, I found that the last full Moon on Feb. 29 was in 1972, and the next will be in 2048

    At least the next one due is well after I retire. ^^

  • (disco) in reply to redwizard

    If you hardcode this date, I'll kill you.

  • (disco) in reply to Gaska
    Gaska:
    I'll kill you.
    I think you'll have to remember it!
  • (disco) in reply to redwizard
    redwizard:
    dcon:
    There's also the * leap day that falls on a full moon

    Poking around the Web, I found that the last full Moon on Feb. 29 was in 1972, and the next will be in 2048

    At least the next one due is well after I retire. ^^

    Should I update that to "leap day that falls on a blue moon"? Wait, damn, that means we're already code-complete...

  • (disco) in reply to Tsaukpaetra

    Considering how most hardcoded date logic ends up working, no, he won't. He'll find out immediately upon February 29, 2048, when everything breaks because he was :doing_it_wrong:

  • (disco) in reply to Fox
    Fox:
    He'll find out immediately upon February 29, 2048, when everything breaks because he was :doing_it_wrong:

    Isn't it part of any employee's exit strategy to leave a zero-day trap somewhere in their work?

  • (disco) in reply to Tsaukpaetra

    Ummm... Noooooo...... >_>

    <_<

    >_>

    *looks over shoulder*

    *deletes some code*

    <_<

    >_>

  • (disco) in reply to Fox
    Fox:
    *looks over shoulder*

    deletes some code

    Were you fired just before your post?

    Brotip: sabotage has to be subtle. Random code deletion isn't subtle.

  • (disco) in reply to Gaska

    Precisely guided code deletion, on the other hand...

    "Oh, that's a nice edge case check you've got here. Would be a shame if something... happened to it."

  • (disco) in reply to Gaska
    Gaska:
    Brotip: sabotage has to be subtle.

    You can always go for the trick of doing the sabotage by just not being there to prevent bad things (like logging filesystems filling up) from happening. Seen that happen a few times. After all, is it really sabotage when you're doing nothing at all and your ex-employer has explicitly instructed you not to do anything otherwise?

    (Not all of our management really thinks that exit interviews are all that necessary. Idiots.)

  • (disco) in reply to Gaska
    Gaska:
    Random

    :wtf::question: Not Sure If Whoosh...

    Tsaukpaetra:
    zero-day trap somewhere
  • (disco) in reply to Fox
    Fox:
    Not Sure If Whoosh...
    Definitely a whoosh. On your side. [spoiler]You didn't say **what** code you're deleting, and I allowed myself a bit of free interpretation.[/spoiler]
  • (disco) in reply to Gaska
    Gaska:
    You didn't say what code you're deleting
    Gaska:
    subtle

    Yeah, you're right,

    Gaska:
    Definitely a whoosh. On **your** side.
  • (disco) in reply to Quite
    Quite:
    I suspect there may be some exaggeration around Vlad's behaviour, but I do feel Maciek's pain of people who consistently prove themselves incapable of entering the test / verification dialogue via e.g. email with the developer assigned to attend to their changes.

    If Maciek has to keep on interacting with this kind of users, the thing to do is send a followup a couple of days later--"Vlad, have you had a chance to validate the changes I made to the report work the way you expected? I cannot put them into production until I have your OK." If he still doesn't respond, then you reply again a few days later, sprinkling with a liberal set of CCs--at least your boss, anyway, so he knows you aren't ignoring the users.

  • (disco)

    TRWTF on this one is the number of people in the comments looking for clues that this was a system they worked on.

  • (disco) in reply to Fox
    Fox:
    Gaska:
    Definitely a whoosh. On **your** side.

    I love when you do this. It shows your lack of basic understanding of text writing. You see, when you put some text in your post and mark it as something someone else said, then all the pronouns will be understood from his perspective - which means, if I said "your", I couldn't have possibly be saying about anything mine. That would just make no sense. So you quoted me saying something about you, and even bolded the word "your", making it look like you agree with me, and emphasize for me the most important part of statement.

    In short - you've just agreed with me that you missed my joke. Which makes much more sense than the opposite, because your one was so blatantly obvious that only @blakeyrat could not get it.

  • (disco) in reply to Gaska
    Fox:
    ,

    That comma implies that I am using a fairly common meme on this site of using a quote as part of my own sentence. So, you're now skirting double whoosh territory with your failed analysis of my use of your pronouns.

  • (disco) in reply to balu2005

    I was expecting the error to be that the report didn't print in color on this guy's monochrome printer.

    I seem to recall one WTF where a lady had placed a white filled rectangle over some information she wanted to hide and she was mad that the printer didn't put white ink over that area.

  • (disco) in reply to Fox
    Fox:
    That comma implies that I am using a fairly common meme on this site of using a quote as part of my own sentence.
    It's common only among your posts. For the reason I stated above.
    Fox:
    failed analysis of my use of your pronouns
    I'd say it was an analysis of your failed use.
  • (disco) in reply to Gaska
    Gaska:
    It's common only among your posts. For the reason I stated above.

    No, it's pretty common meme used by numerous other people. I vaguely recall seeing you do so once or twice, even.

  • (disco) in reply to Fox

    Maybe they've got their pronouns right?

  • (disco) in reply to george_gonzalez
    george_gonzalez:
    I seem to recall one WTF where a lady had placed a white filled rectangle over some information she wanted to hide and she was mad that the printer didn't put white ink over that area.

    :wtf: I would be mad too. Assuming the program was supposed to be WYSIWYG.

  • (disco) in reply to PleegWat
    PleegWat:
    What's with the initial warning about names containing `Enterprise`, while none of the products in the article actually have such a name?
    From the article:
    Maciek recently had his own horrifying encounter with Microsoft’s own **Enterprise** Resource Planning tool, Dynamics AX.
    A bit of a weak link perhaps, but that's no reason not to make a dig at "Enterprise" software.
  • (disco) in reply to PleegWat
  • (disco) in reply to RFoxmich

    And Easter, don't forget Easter. Or the fact that the calendar in certain Arab states is dependent on being able to see the sun on a particular morning, otherwise the new month hasn't started yet.

  • (disco) in reply to Steve_The_Cynic

    I like the wording, 'If you have not replied to this email within 10 business days then I will assume that you are happy with the updated whatever and will add this to the record before pushing the change live'.

  • (disco) in reply to John_Imrie
    John_Imrie:
    will assume that you are happy with the updated whatever and will add this to the record before pushing the change live

    No no no! If they have not replied in 10 days assume that the change was not necessary and discard it. Can't push potentially broken things live, if they need it they will find the time.

  • (disco)

    Every single field in the report was named “textbox45” or “textbox94”.

    There were just two fields? I cannot imagine an environment where multiple fields could be named “textbox45”.

    A week went by with no reply from Vlad. Maciek moved on to other tasks.

    That's the spirit. I also tend to just read TDWTF for a week after completing an assignment and until I get some feedback.

  • (disco) in reply to na5ch
    na5ch:
    Steve_The_Cynic:
    There is this ubiquitous rumour that Outlook has a calendar function, and that this calendar function even works without an Exchange Server. Send the email, then create a meeting request for yourself to do the follow up.

    While useful, that is not the same as the feature he was pondering. I'm not sure if you were suggesting the feature already exists, or offering a workaround.

    Workaround.

Leave a comment on “The Enterprise Axe”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

Log Out

« Return to Article