4 ms·

> The core issue here is reviewer saying “if you change this, you also have to fix other pending issues in codebase”. I don't agree. IMO, the worst issue bein

> The core issue here is reviewer saying “if you change this, you also have to fix other pending issues in codebase”. I don't agree. IMO, the worst issue being displayed here is that of the "6 days to change 1 line of code," almost half of them elapsed before an engineer ever looked at the issue. If this is such a high priority issue that the company would "need" (scare quotes intentional) to do a layoff if it's not implemented soon, those 2-3 days before anyone looked at it should never have happened. And that is apparently what passes for "the fast track" in this development process. And then there's the 2 days at the end of this 6 day period where it looks like nothing happened, because the test plan was deemed insufficient. "If you change this, you also have to fix other pending issues" only took up 2 hours here. There are at least 2 or 3 other things I could fill in here that I'd flag as core issues with this process before I'd even think about dealing with this part of the process.

nojvek 3y ago
You are correct. Orthogonal to the PR process is incompetence of management being unable to identify key stakeholders and communicating the urgency and importance. It should have been some VP realizes how important this is. Gets the security folks, testing folks, Senior devs, team manager in a room and task them at figuring how how to solve this very specific problem before it impacts a layoff. I didn’t really understand the difference between good and bad management until I had multiple different managers and VPs over a decade at different companies. The difference between good and great is night and day once you witness an exemplary communicator who can get the right people together and give them focus.