I barely proof read anything I type on my phone, and my comment history is a testament to that. I deploy code or system changes most days, but I proof read the shit out of those on top of the QC they goes through. Any company worth anything will have a process for reviewing and approving anything being deployed, or probably destroyed for that matter.

[–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 31 points 23 hours ago

You vastly overestimate the number of companies that are 'worth anything'.

[–] almost1337@lemmy.zip 14 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (2 children)

Up until recently I worked for a company worth anything, and you would be surprised at how many major outages were caused by either skipping the process or gaps in the process.

You know that adage: "the safety rules are written in blood"? The same is true for change processes, just with a cost measured in dollars instead of human injury/worse.

[–] yggstyle@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago

So we called this meeting to discuss a change in procedures. HR would like us to remind you that this is entirely unrelated to last week. Also has anyone seen Joe? We'd like him to be here for this. No reason why.

[–] Sergio@piefed.social 10 points 21 hours ago

Or sometimes there are just multiple failures. That's what I learned from reading Admiral Cloudberg about air disasters: even if you have n safety measures, there's still the chance that there'll be n+1 failures.

[–] Earthwormjim91@lemmy.world 4 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Code should ideally be going through tests before prod anyway. There should be no code changed from successful test to prod. Proofreading shouldn’t matter at that point. Just scheduling the actual deploy.

[–] BassTurd@lemmy.world 4 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

I mostly mean proof what I've written prior to having someone else test. I often will comment out lines when trying different things so I just make sure I clean up what I've done. We have a few human checks as well as some automated checks between each stage of deployment for each environment.

[–] Earthwormjim91@lemmy.world 1 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Yeah that’s what the MRs are supposed to be for. To catch those and proofread.

There shouldn’t be any changes at all from the last test to going to production though. Even cleaning up comments.

[–] BassTurd@lemmy.world 1 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Correct. I'm just saying that I proof read my work, that I deploy things, and that I don't proof read my texts.

[–] Earthwormjim91@lemmy.world 2 points 18 hours ago

No I got that. I’m saying that by the time the prod deploy comes around, there’s no proofreading left to do anyway.

Not proofreading texts should have zero bearing on being able to write and deploy software because it should be proofread several times before the actual prod deployment. Hell it very likely isn’t even the same person doing the deployment that wrote the code.