These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page12
 

CCP, what has changed?

First post First post
Author
JC Anderson
RED ROSE THORN
#21 - 2014-06-04 16:34:40 UTC  |  Edited by: JC Anderson
Marsha Mallow wrote:
Pretty sure we can still bellyache about something.


TO THE STATUES! TIME TO ORBIT!
Marsha Mallow
#22 - 2014-06-04 16:39:06 UTC
Has anyone ever bothered to do a highsec conga?

Ripard Teg > For the morons in the room:

Sweets > U can dd my face any day

Doreen Kaundur
#23 - 2014-06-04 17:03:35 UTC
Gregor Parud wrote:
Genuine question without (trying to) have a smirking undertone; What has changed over the years that resulted in expansions being smooth as ****, as they are now? Previous expansions caused uhm... issues and in some case quite a lot of them but it seems these days you have that **** down.

Again, not interested in finger pointing, trolling or anything. Just genuinely curious.


Mid level management changes.

Im sure people getting fired "leaving to to other companies" has alot to do with it.


[center]1. Minor navigation color change. 2. Show bookmarks in the overview.[/center]

Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#24 - 2014-06-04 17:27:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Ralph King-Griffin
stoicfaux wrote:
Continual process improvement. If you have standardized build and deployment processes, then you can a) automate them, and b) you can improve them as you re-use them. However, if your processes rely on ad-hoc and/or manual steps, then every process is unique and thus cannot be re-used which means no process improvement. Meaning every ad-hoc/manual step has probably only been tested once or twice (or not at all) in a QA/pre-staging environment by your SCM/deployment team before being run by hand during the production deployment (which occurs during off-hours when everyone is brain dead.) Manual steps are not a recipe for success on the first try.

Follow the damn Process: (aka "fast isn't fast, smooth is fast.") Taking short cuts, at best, tends to result in a gain in the immediate short term. Some of the time. For a few people. Short cuts, in the average case, tend to make more work because your shortcut tends to get someone else downstream screwed, e.g. a developer who "re-uses" a ticket to check-in instead of creating a new one has saved themselves a few minutes of work, but now the QA team isn't going to get an accurate build report and will waste time re-testing the wrong thing, thus the check-in will contain untested code, which could introduce bugs, which will confuse the prod support team (according to the patch notes, that system wasn't changed, so we didn't troubleshoot it!) which results in the developer having to work extra and/or off-hours to find the problem and check-in the fix. A fix that requires the following people's time to implement: dev, dev manager, dev ops, change control board, SCM, QA, spouses & children, etc..

Following and Improving the Processes tends to result in smoother dev cycles, i.e. more time working and less time fighting fires. This is in turn reduces stress, results in people getting more sleep (i.e. less off-hours bug-hunting, fewer people needed for off-hours deployments, etc.) Which in turn results in a better quality of life for your teams, which results in happier employees, which results in lower turnover, which results in more experienced devs, and expreienced devs are many, many, many more times more efficient than a horde of newbies.


tl;dr - Only a moron (aka a bad developer) calls it red tape.

/rant off

Told ye, Thoroughbred Hamsters.
Lors Dornick
Kallisti Industries
#25 - 2014-06-04 20:32:51 UTC
Brooks Puuntai wrote:
Feeding QA people will beer would be counter productive...

Even they are allowed to relax.

CCP Greyscale: As to starbases, we agree it's pretty terrible, but we don't want to delay the entire release just for this one factor.

Previous page12