Re: Development and offshoring was Re: IBM file status 97 (was: Prodcuing an output file onlyonFriday?

In article <dunuj2lsrlmfl2562ajued527airpmi4db@xxxxxxx>,
Clark Morris <cfmtech@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

[snip]

Coding is the easiest part. It is the analysis, research, control and
testing that is difficult.

It is obvious that Space Aliens are stealing my brainwaves and implanting
them in the heads of others yet again; I was saying almost this Very Same
Thing in a meeting the other day.

A user in the field noticed an error in a report that has been running,
more-or-less unchanged, since some time around Magellan's
circumnavigation. This hot, steaming load gets dumped into my lap; I
ascertain that the last time the programs involved were compiled was for
Y2K mods (anyone remember those?) and dig through the data.

I find out that this subsystem is built around an inherent flaw, a naieve
way of dealing with the complexities of 'how many two-week pay periods are
in a given quarter of a year?'... this can be discussed in another thread,
if anyone is interested. Anyhow, in the meeting mentioned above someone
was complaining about the bad results, I explained what was going on -
*always* a Fun Thing when dealing with folks who announce proudly 'Well,
I'm not Technical, you know' - and concluded with:

'The problem lies, in essence, with how people are to be counted by office
for a pay period. Given that this report does not count 'fractional
people'... when I run across Person A who makes $A for Office A in pay
period 1 and then I run across Person A making $B - which may or may not
be equal to $A - for Office B in pay period 2 of the same quarter... how
do you want that person and those dollars counted and totalled for a given
month in a given quarter? I don't know what you want - if I were a mind
reader then I might not be doing this for a living - so you have to tell
me how you want to see this; once you tell me the code will write
it'sself.'

(room goes silent)

The fellow then replies, in a small, weaselly voice, 'I don't see why you
just can't turn it back and make it the way it was before.'

'This *is* the way it was before, either the data have changed or someone
is noticing the error for the first time. If I change the data then the
results are inaccurate; I cannot change the fact that someone notices
errors. So... when Person A makes $A for Office A in pay period 1
(etc)... how do you want that counted?'

'I *still* don't see why *you* just can't turn if back and make it the way
it was before.'

DD

.