4 ms·
So you commit to Git. Sally makes a change to column 1 of record 1. Billy makes a change to column 2 of record 1 a nanosecond later. You commit to Git again.
by irrational 6y ago
So you commit to Git.
Sally makes a change to column 1 of record 1.
Billy makes a change to column 2 of record 1 a nanosecond later.
You commit to Git again.
Your boss wants to know who changed column 1 of record 1.
You report it was Billy.
Billy is fired.
- TeeMassive 6y agoYour boss let changes go through the production DB directly Your boss decides to fire people as a solution Your boss should be fired
- livvelupp 6y agoYour boss doesn't micro manage You should be taking care of this, not Billy
- TeeMassive 6y agoFiring a team member for a team mistake is micromanagement.
- irrational 6y agoI’m assuming Billy was fired because Sally made an unethical or illegal change.
- antonvs 6y agoBilly did nothing wrong!
- irrational 6y agoI’m assuming the change Sally made was an unethical or illegal change.
- simonw 6y agoYou report it could have been Sally or Billy
- irrational 6y agoThat isn’t how this works. Based on OPs description, the fact that Sally made a change is gone since the last editor was Billy. It looks like Billy made the change to both column 1 and 2.
- simonw 6y agoYou tell your boss: "Just so you know, we only take a snapshot every X minutes... so there's a chance Billy wasn't the person who made that change. If you had told me you were planning to fire people as a result of this tracking system I might have spent more than five minutes hacking it together with a cronjob and a git repository."