3 ms·
> three people got confused about what they needed to do, and they all thought they completed their task successfully when they didn't. > For example, before a
by FalconSensei 6y ago
> three people got confused about what they needed to do, and they all thought they completed their task successfully when they didn't.
> For example, before actually sending any transaction there could be a screen saying: - Summary of transaction - X$ will be sent to account XYZ - X$ will be sent to account ABC
These sums up what I think too. I get that internal software is more complex, and bank transaction are also complex, but when three people checked it, though it was good to go and didn't realize a mistake until the next day, that's a problem.
Showing a summary of how much is being sent to where, and how much is going to stay in the account is the minimum I would expect for a finance software that's used to transfer millions of dollars in a single action.
- behringer 6y agoDid 3 people really check it though? I've worked with many groups where the one guy takes the lead and the other 2 are like "sure, whatever."
- FalconSensei 6y agoYeah, I'm familiar with that. My old boss used to say that a dog that has 2 owners die of hunger. When we started having 2 reviewers for PRs, he was adamant that there will be ONE that would be the person actually responsible for it. So the main reviewer always had the same responsibility as if they were the sole reviewer.