3 ms·
The bad thing is what they did, not that the disclosed it. I agree that this is probably to their disadvantage, but I would much rather have people admitting t
by Lerc 2y ago
The bad thing is what they did, not that the disclosed it.
I agree that this is probably to their disadvantage, but I would much rather have people admitting their faults than hiding them. If everyone did this the world would be better.
Of course the best solution is to not have faults but that is like saying that the solution to being poor is to have lots of money. It's much easier to say than do.
- theamk 2y agoThe bad thing is their engineering culture and not anything technical. We all make mistakes, the question is how we fix them. Look a the last sentences of the post: > Yes we should have done more testing. Yes we shouldn't have copy pasted code. Yes we shouldn't have pushed directly to main. Regardless, I don't regret the experience. None of those are unconditionally bad! Every project I've worked on could use more testing; we all copy-pasted code at least occasionally, and pushing to main is fine in some circumstances. The real problem is that they went live, but their tooling (or knowledge how to use it) was so bad it took 5 days to solve the simple issue; and meanwhile, they kept pushing new code ("10-20 commits/day") while their customers were suffering. This is what really causes the reputation hit.