Being told to fix bugs caused by others
-
I created part of a web app. Another dev went in and changed how some code works and a modal dialog stopped working (it shows as an empty modal with only the title, but underneath there's an exception). Guess who was assigned the bug? Of course the creator of the tool, that would be me. This happens from time to time and I hate it. I feel that whoever breaks stuff should be publicly shamed ;) (for example in the CI server's website, but of course my client doesn't have CI...) and responsible for fixing it. I am sure this was discussed a dozen times here, sorry. This really grinds my gears.
Do you really think the person who broke it, has the skill set to fix it? Public shaming doesn't work and it is terrible for morale.
-
I created part of a web app. Another dev went in and changed how some code works and a modal dialog stopped working (it shows as an empty modal with only the title, but underneath there's an exception). Guess who was assigned the bug? Of course the creator of the tool, that would be me. This happens from time to time and I hate it. I feel that whoever breaks stuff should be publicly shamed ;) (for example in the CI server's website, but of course my client doesn't have CI...) and responsible for fixing it. I am sure this was discussed a dozen times here, sorry. This really grinds my gears.
-
I created part of a web app. Another dev went in and changed how some code works and a modal dialog stopped working (it shows as an empty modal with only the title, but underneath there's an exception). Guess who was assigned the bug? Of course the creator of the tool, that would be me. This happens from time to time and I hate it. I feel that whoever breaks stuff should be publicly shamed ;) (for example in the CI server's website, but of course my client doesn't have CI...) and responsible for fixing it. I am sure this was discussed a dozen times here, sorry. This really grinds my gears.
Pawel Krakowiak wrote:
Another dev went in and changed how some code works
Pawel Krakowiak wrote:
This really grinds my gears.
This brings back old memories. Years ago at a large corp. I was forced to write code over a weekend, because "it had to be comleted". I did the work, wrote some documentation, wrote test cases and put the code out for QA team. Of course, even though it had to be done immediately, they never got around to the code for weeks later. Oh, yes, this was HIGH PRIORITY. Whatever. Anyways, weeks later, the guy puts the stuff into production and someone comes to me. "That fails upon start up. Can you have a look." I looked at the code. What? Wait. I've never seen this code. Even though it's supposedly my code. What is going on? After much searching I find a contractor. An architect who is certainly my genius master. He says, "Oh, I rewrote that code." "Well, you did a bang up job," I said. "It doesn't even start. You're going to have to fix it." "I don't do that," he said. Later my boss told me I had to fix The Genius Architect's code even though I had already written code that worked and the GENIUS rewrote my code. What?!? (deployment of interrobang) That is utter stupidity!!! I totally understand your frustration. He who touches code should fix it!!!
-
Pawel Krakowiak wrote:
bugs caused by others
NO WAY! You mean to tell me bugs are caused by others? :omg: :wtf:
»»» Loading Signature «««· · · Please Wait · · ·:badger: :badger: :badger:Yeah, that came as a shock to me too. Until this point, I thought you were the sole cause of all bugs. ;P
-
Do you really think the person who broke it, has the skill set to fix it? Public shaming doesn't work and it is terrible for morale.
Slacker007 wrote:
Public shaming doesn't work and it is terrible for morale.
I saw a plugin or something (years ago) for Continuous Integration servers which on a failed build adds the avatar of the dev who broke it and displays it on the page. ;) I think it's part of the game, it's not real shaming, just an incentive to quickly fix what you broke. No one wants his mugshot to be posted next to a failed build. ;)
-
Pawel Krakowiak wrote:
Another dev went in and changed how some code works
Pawel Krakowiak wrote:
This really grinds my gears.
This brings back old memories. Years ago at a large corp. I was forced to write code over a weekend, because "it had to be comleted". I did the work, wrote some documentation, wrote test cases and put the code out for QA team. Of course, even though it had to be done immediately, they never got around to the code for weeks later. Oh, yes, this was HIGH PRIORITY. Whatever. Anyways, weeks later, the guy puts the stuff into production and someone comes to me. "That fails upon start up. Can you have a look." I looked at the code. What? Wait. I've never seen this code. Even though it's supposedly my code. What is going on? After much searching I find a contractor. An architect who is certainly my genius master. He says, "Oh, I rewrote that code." "Well, you did a bang up job," I said. "It doesn't even start. You're going to have to fix it." "I don't do that," he said. Later my boss told me I had to fix The Genius Architect's code even though I had already written code that worked and the GENIUS rewrote my code. What?!? (deployment of interrobang) That is utter stupidity!!! I totally understand your frustration. He who touches code should fix it!!!
newton.saber wrote:
He who touches code should fix it!!!
THIS.
-
Yeah, that came as a shock to me too. Until this point, I thought you were the sole cause of all bugs. ;P
-
Pawel Krakowiak wrote:
I feel that whoever breaks stuff should be publicly shamed
That would include everyone at some point then. :^)
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
Of course it would! I have never met a developer who never introduces any bugs. I am fully aware I'd be shamed on occasion as well.
-
Of course it would! I have never met a developer who never introduces any bugs. I am fully aware I'd be shamed on occasion as well.
-
Slacker007 wrote:
Public shaming doesn't work and it is terrible for morale.
I saw a plugin or something (years ago) for Continuous Integration servers which on a failed build adds the avatar of the dev who broke it and displays it on the page. ;) I think it's part of the game, it's not real shaming, just an incentive to quickly fix what you broke. No one wants his mugshot to be posted next to a failed build. ;)
I used to work in a shop where if you broke the build you had to wear a ridiculous sombrero; big one at that. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sombrero[^]
-
I used to work in a shop where if you broke the build you had to wear a ridiculous sombrero; big one at that. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sombrero[^]
LOL. That's awesome. :laugh:
-
Of course it would! I have never met a developer who never introduces any bugs. I am fully aware I'd be shamed on occasion as well.
-
I created part of a web app. Another dev went in and changed how some code works and a modal dialog stopped working (it shows as an empty modal with only the title, but underneath there's an exception). Guess who was assigned the bug? Of course the creator of the tool, that would be me. This happens from time to time and I hate it. I feel that whoever breaks stuff should be publicly shamed ;) (for example in the CI server's website, but of course my client doesn't have CI...) and responsible for fixing it. I am sure this was discussed a dozen times here, sorry. This really grinds my gears.
Pawel Krakowiak wrote:
... web app ... modal dialog ...
Hopefully not using
showModalDialog? That's been disabled in Chrome[^], and deprecated in Firefox[^].
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
-
I created part of a web app. Another dev went in and changed how some code works and a modal dialog stopped working (it shows as an empty modal with only the title, but underneath there's an exception). Guess who was assigned the bug? Of course the creator of the tool, that would be me. This happens from time to time and I hate it. I feel that whoever breaks stuff should be publicly shamed ;) (for example in the CI server's website, but of course my client doesn't have CI...) and responsible for fixing it. I am sure this was discussed a dozen times here, sorry. This really grinds my gears.
Sorry, but I'm with Pete on this one. Public shaming is never going to work out well.
-
Quote:
I have never met a developer who never introduces any bugs
You should go down to the job center, I'm sure you'll find a few developers down there who haven't introduced bugs in months.
What, there are unemployed software engineers?!
-
Sorry, but I'm with Pete on this one. Public shaming is never going to work out well.
-
I created part of a web app. Another dev went in and changed how some code works and a modal dialog stopped working (it shows as an empty modal with only the title, but underneath there's an exception). Guess who was assigned the bug? Of course the creator of the tool, that would be me. This happens from time to time and I hate it. I feel that whoever breaks stuff should be publicly shamed ;) (for example in the CI server's website, but of course my client doesn't have CI...) and responsible for fixing it. I am sure this was discussed a dozen times here, sorry. This really grinds my gears.
Any developer introduces bugs. It is the direct consequence of writing code. There is no point in shaming, even playfully - just point it out and correct it, or ask the one who introduced it to fix it (maybe there was some good reason and you yourself break something trying to fix it). One thing that must be clear is that any relevant change must be tagged in the comments and in the changelog, so that it is backtrackable. I work duo with a colleague, and when I change some established code I never remove it, just comment out the prevoius lines, insert my own and tag with "[NAMEOFTHEMODIFICATION] xx/mm/yyyy Denis: I did this because...". The same does he (ok, not really, but if it's not tagged it's him ;))
-
I created part of a web app. Another dev went in and changed how some code works and a modal dialog stopped working (it shows as an empty modal with only the title, but underneath there's an exception). Guess who was assigned the bug? Of course the creator of the tool, that would be me. This happens from time to time and I hate it. I feel that whoever breaks stuff should be publicly shamed ;) (for example in the CI server's website, but of course my client doesn't have CI...) and responsible for fixing it. I am sure this was discussed a dozen times here, sorry. This really grinds my gears.
Don't think of them as bugs, think of them as "opportunities". ;) The Art of Maintenance Programming[^]
-
Slacker007 wrote:
Public shaming doesn't work and it is terrible for morale.
I saw a plugin or something (years ago) for Continuous Integration servers which on a failed build adds the avatar of the dev who broke it and displays it on the page. ;) I think it's part of the game, it's not real shaming, just an incentive to quickly fix what you broke. No one wants his mugshot to be posted next to a failed build. ;)
Pawel Krakowiak wrote:
it's not real shaming
I would say that's up the shamed person to decide.
Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello (√-shit)2
-
Ahem. With colleagues, always praise in public and criticize them in private (i.e., to them and not just talking about them behind their back).
Pete O'Hanlon wrote:
With colleagues, always praise in public and criticize them in private
I sit on both sides of the fence with this one. I agree because it fosters better working relationships, but I disagree because it frequently creates an illusion of competency, especially to management and new co-workers. The only way out of this that I've found is to take Dale Carnegie's approach of combining some positive aspect with a necessary criticism. Though it sometimes is damned hard to find something positive other than "Joe worked really hard on this but unfortunately, all his hard work had to be thrown out the window." :) Personally, I wish we didn't have to "handle" people with velveteen gloves. That, and position and salary should be determined by one's peers (with, of course, the subject's evaluation of the ability of others to evaluate him/her as part of the equation.) *evil grin* Marc
Imperative to Functional Programming Succinctly Higher Order Programming