|
Volmarias posted:Does your customer pay per piece of work delivered with the ability to change their minds until they're "happy"? It sounds like someone might be trying to build a case to either have the customer pay extra for every change, or pay by the hour. We are a backend/web api/integration team and all our consumers are other internal dev teams, but we're not even a software business so at no point does a customer directly pay for any of what we do. We have a bunch of extremely bad product owners and scrum masters who didn't want to give up being PMs and are hyper defensive/blame other teams when they over promise and under deliver. But that's not even really the driver here, it all apparently "came from the top" that the CEO wants to see ~how efficient~ each team is.
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 03:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 22:38 |
|
|
Xik posted:We are a backend/web api/integration team and all our consumers are other internal dev teams, but we're not even a software business so at no point does a customer directly pay for any of what we do. Good news! You now have an easy to find number to inflate your estimates by to be perfect!
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 03:41
|
|
|
Xik posted:We now have a "waste" user story in every sprint (tasks are categories of "waste") so that multiple layers of management can run reports on team efficiency. We are required to record our hours in the category tasks when we spend time doing these things. Includes gems like "environmental", "rework", "waiting on others". "Rework" is of course for adding time where we deliver things and then the consumer has "changed their requirements" and we have to modify it. Working on environments is very wasteful, I can see where they are coming from. Are you guys already pestered if too many hours are spend on waste?
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 05:52
|
|
|
Xik posted:We are a backend/web api/integration team and all our consumers are other internal dev teams, but we're not even a software business so at no point does a customer directly pay for any of what we do. Oh, I missed this one. It seems like software devs are overhead anyway. Good luck and enjoy the trip.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 05:53
|
|
|
Keetron posted:Working on environments is very wasteful, I can see where they are coming from. Are you guys already pestered if too many hours are spend on waste? Yeah... much of our time is wasted on our crappy environments, pointless security dances and tedious change control process but it's all already known. There are frequent "surveys" and other calls for feedback about this stuff and all the devs say the same thing every time. Most of it just ends up being ignored but every now and then a team is spun-up to address one of these things, but they waste 6/12/18 months with architects, burn all the budget and then mothball because there were no results lol. Keetron posted:Oh, I missed this one. It seems like software devs are overhead anyway. Good luck and enjoy the trip. Exactly. I think I'm going to start looking elsewhere. I have no doubt dedicated software shops will have their own quirks, but at least I won't be in a place where the majority of the IT department is considered "non-technical"...
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 06:30
|
|
|
In my new role, every three months we have a big planning meeting where every team commits to the features they will be developing and what sprint they will do each story. If your team doesn’t meet your goals for each sprint and the overall quarter, you are raked over the coals. Somehow this is called agile.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 13:05
|
|
|
smackfu posted:In my new role, every three months we have a big planning meeting where every team commits to the features they will be developing and what sprint they will do each story. If your team doesn’t meet your goals for each sprint and the overall quarter, you are raked over the coals. Are you using SAFE? Because I've seen that happen a lot in those environments.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 13:19
|
|
|
smackfu posted:In my new role, every three months we have a big planning meeting where every team commits to the features they will be developing and what sprint they will do each story. If your team doesn’t meet your goals for each sprint and the overall quarter, you are raked over the coals. did you guys know that the notion of scrum being agile is an anachronism? scrum was actually codified in 1995 and existed in the early 1990's. the agile manifesto was signed in 2001. if you sit through eliassen group training meetings on agile, they'll bring up agile and they have this whole oral history of the signatories of agile etc, who are liked to the signers of the declaration of independence visually in the graphics. suddenly, there is a switch to this scrum, which existed before the agile manifesto and whose only relationship with agile is seemingly that agile is a cool word that people are willing to pay a bunch of money to look like. my working theory is that the scrum consultants happened upon a cia backdoor / pattern of mind control implanted by high school civics class that was intended for cia use in case of emergencies, and that's how it began to spread.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 14:25
|
|
|
Xguard86 posted:Are you using SAFE? Yeah this is the first thing I thought. The thread title is definitely too real at times.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 15:06
|
|
|
smackfu posted:In my new role, every three months we have a big planning meeting where every team commits to the features they will be developing and what sprint they will do each story. If your team doesn’t meet your goals for each sprint and the overall quarter, you are raked over the coals. This is everything but agile.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 15:31
|
|
|
Xik posted:We now have a "waste" user story in every sprint (tasks are categories of "waste") so that multiple layers of management can run reports on team efficiency. We are required to record our hours in the category tasks when we spend time doing these things. Includes gems like "environmental", "rework", "waiting on others". "Rework" is of course for adding time where we deliver things and then the consumer has "changed their requirements" and we have to modify it. Tracking waste isn't that weird, it is good for identifying bottlenecks that could be improved. If it is being used to blame you for "wasting" time then yeah, that's hosed up
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 15:37
|
|
|
Jose Valasquez posted:Tracking waste isn't that weird, it is good for identifying bottlenecks that could be improved. If it is being used to blame you for "wasting" time then yeah, that's hosed up What’s gonna happen is that now there are new definitions for “wasting time”: - Addressing tech debt - Determining if a user actually needs something - Walking about to clear your mind - Doctor appointments - Lunch - 9-to-5 schedules
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2018 20:25
|
|
|
Speaking of waste, it turns out our group has been making a loss for a couple of years. The strategy from the top is to get rid of people and make efficiencies. I guess this works if you have some glaring issues, but otherwise I kinda feel like once that's your model for making money you're basically committing to a death spiral. The obvious good solution is to find out why we so rarely get from clients saying 'yes, lets work together' to them actually signing a contract, and why when we do it takes so long, but I guess that doesn't have the instant appeal of saying you saved $$$ (by firing all the expensive (good) people)
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2018 00:28
|
|
|
I managed to get an AspectJ plugin working in Cradle and now I kind of feel unstoppable. It was kind of ridiculous how much of a struggle it was though; there's basically zero documentation for it even though AspectJ is sorta-popular? Anyone else have stories where you struggle on something simple and then it suddenly works?
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 12:56
|
|
|
SardonicTyrant posted:Anyone else have stories where you struggle on something simple and then it suddenly works? Excuse me as I recount the entirety of my career
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 13:28
|
|
|
ChickenWing posted:Excuse me as I recount the entirety of my career 
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 13:32
|
|
|
SardonicTyrant posted:Anyone else have stories where you struggle on something simple, declare it completely impossible, tell the PM it’s a few more story points of work, end up having to work on it anyway, run your brain ragged over it for a day, go to sleep, come back the next day, and then it suddenly works? And then you feel like a fraud, a cheat, and a mooch? ChickenWing posted:Excuse me as I recount the entirety of my career
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 13:39
|
|
|
Not true, sometimes things work great right away, and then suddenly stop working
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 13:41
|
|
|
I spent all day yesterday frustrated because I forgot that 'map' doesn't change the original object..... '
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 14:20
|
|
|
If things work great right away that's when you know you've truly hosed up somewhere
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 14:23
|
|
|
Yeah that's my favorite: "I'm not done yet but I'm gonna hit run anyways to see how it brea--wait why did that work something is very wrong"
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 14:24
|
|
|
Jose Valasquez posted:If things work great right away that's when you know you've truly hosed up somewhere The scariest moment when I was still new was when I wrote something and it worked correctly the first time. I still get chills thinking about it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 14:53
|
|
|
There are few things more annoying than a test that starts out green, because when I see that I know I'm about to waste a couple hours on some bullshit.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 15:39
|
|
|
I just did the classic head-scratch at a test that shouldn't've been green yet, but was, because I pointed it at the wrong function.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 15:43
|
|
|
I always put incorrect expected values the first time I run tests just to make sure it can actually fail
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 15:54
|
|
|
I wasted ~half a day just last week because I forgot to add public setters to a POCO and couldn't figure out why all the properties were null coming out of AutoMapper 
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 15:55
|
|
|
Fellatio del Toro posted:I always put incorrect expected values the first time I run tests just to make sure it can actually fail You should be adding tests for unhappy paths along with tests for your happy paths.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 15:57
|
|
|
Volmarias posted:You should be adding tests for unhappy paths along with tests for your happy paths. I'm not talking about unhappy paths, I've seen incorrectly written tests passing when they shouldn't so now in my paranoia I force them to fail first and then fix it
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 16:03
|
|
|
Fellatio del Toro posted:I always put incorrect expected values the first time I run tests just to make sure it can actually fail yeah, so when your test passes despite that, it's a real mindfuck. it's happened to me a bunch of times (usually something like = instead of == or something along those lines, much better to use the api than to write the comparison yourself in most cases)
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 16:04
|
|
|
Fellatio del Toro posted:I'm not talking about unhappy paths, I've seen incorrectly written tests passing when they shouldn't so now in my paranoia I force them to fail first and then fix it Sounds like TDD.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 16:36
|
|
|
In true TDD you first write some basic test that should fail and you do the minimal to make that green. And then add the next that should fail,etcetc. In the end you refactor while everything should stay green. Especially when unsure on how to approach a problem, writing tests on the desired solutions is pretty solid.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 16:39
|
|
|
I like it when they're green because you forgot the asserts 
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 21:19
|
|
|
There is a reason why the testing framework I maintain can report failure when there were no asserts run 
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 21:32
|
|
|
Assert.True(true);
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 21:50
|
|
|
There is not much to do once you start assuming malicious intent 
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 11:51
|
|
|
redleader posted:Assert.True(true); The junit framework only reports red on a test if an assert fails. I have encountered tests in the wild that simply had the line with the assert in it commented out to make it pass.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 12:03
|
|
|
Keetron posted:In true TDD you first write some basic test that should fail and you do the minimal to make that green. And then add the next that should fail,etcetc. In the end you refactor while everything should stay green. A few weeks ago, I copied an existing test, modified it for a new feature I was going to write, and it passed... before I wrote the feature. So now I had two tests to fix 
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 12:08
|
|
|
I could have sworn detecting state and federal holidays was a solved problem with existing support. The gently caress you mean I gotta implement Columbus Day myself 
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 21:28
|
|
|
Pollyanna posted:I could have sworn detecting state and federal holidays was a solved problem with existing support. The gently caress you mean I gotta implement Columbus Day myself Some day you should look up how Easter is calculated.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 21:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 22:38 |
|
|
Rocko Bonaparte posted:Some day you should look up how Easter is calculated.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 21:52
|
|
