4 ms·

First, note the phrase "could not get it to repeat when we tried to track it down." Secondly, I'm pretty sure that that flag wasn't just labelled SERIOUS_RUNTI

First, note the phrase "could not get it to repeat when we tried to track it down." Secondly, I'm pretty sure that that flag wasn't just labelled SERIOUS_RUNTIME_ISSUE_ACTIVE; there were presumably other good reasons for the flag to be set the way it was, and other serious problems that flipping it might have caused, as far as they could determine pre-launch.

JoeAltmaier 10y ago
Nope. It was a semaphore, and it had a flag, and it was set wrong (contrary to policy), and they noticed it and documented it. Whether or not they could reproduce the problem they had already predicted the only reason NOT to fix the bug was, institutional inertia. I.e. can't change code because the process says we cant without an elaborate ritual.