There is literally no code reviews, people are pushing stuff to prod, there is zero code quality checking.
Better to get the 6 months pay and then leave this dumpster fire, rather than stay and stagnate.
4 replies (most recent on top)
@OP LOL, I've been saying that for years now, and you are right on both accounts. Also
@1kaf+1osfvh72 is right that reviewers are the less skilled people. I know this LL5 pet that cannot code his way out of a paper bag, but he's the technical reviewer of the group.
I was just think the other day about the GCP transition. We have so many systems that overlap each other, and they do so inefficiently.
Now I get that once things are mostly in GCP, that overlap will (should) be easier to find and eliminate, but there is plenty of low hanging fruit. Instead we just put 1 person on a simple task of transitioning the system to GCP, recreating any inefficiencies and overlap.
Pretty much anything that deals with parts engineering/logistics has 7 systems, 6 of which overlap, just to handle the limitations of the root system. Don't even start on peogram dev/launch. So d-mb. So wasteful. They'll all cheep though when everything has transitioned. A new CEO will come in by them and move us to some other framework, restarting the entire process.
Depends on the team (eg. I have heard Ford Pro is better about this) - but for sure there are no universal standards. At least in my org, most SWEs are either agency with no incentive (and sometimes no skillset) to improve anything, or non-technical managers who don't know any better.
All we can look forward to are new random audits for "tech debt" and scanning tools we have to add to our already bloated CI/CD pipelines which nobody understands and everyone promptly ignores until your team gets dinged in a report somewhere.
I dont know which area you are in, but in my experience, my groups ALWAYS had tech reviews before code went into prod. It was a part of the checklist and I did not approve code moves without the reviews. The groups were disciplined and never deviated from that requirement. Did code occasionally need to be redone? Yup, but I would guess it was less than 2% that had to be fixed.