Re: Do you have a Knowledge Officer?
- From: Alistair <alistair@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2007 12:52:08 -0700
On 29 Sep, 21:39, Robert <n...@xxxxxx> wrote:
On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 10:28:24 -0700, Alistair <alist...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Documentation is not maintained; all too often, updates are
completed with no time allotted to update documentation. So knowledge
is not important.
Wrong. Every line of code can be traced back through a Detailed Design and High Level
Design to a Business Requirement. And it can be traced forward through as many levels of
test results all the way to a User Acceptance Test.
I hope that was said with your tongue in your cheek. I can assure you
that many systems that I have worked in did not maintain documentation
after release and, therefore, the only reliable documentation was the
code. And where that says things like 'remove after 1984' (in code
being maintained in 1997) or 'I dont know what this does so I left it
in. If you have got this far then you are a braver man than I am'!
THEY wrote the code. Don't they talk to each other?
IT people are world renowned for their inability to communicate in
clear to any but techies.
As for Robert's 4-hour escalation in the knowledge free guru
environment: when I worked on a support team we were held to 30
minutes before being ceremonially dis-embowelled (failure was not
tolerated).
How long does it take to write a PERL script to discard bad transactions?
Pearl? Wazzat? Does it run on Big Iron?
I once naively suggested we should at least save employee numbers from the paychecks we
were deleting. The scornful answer was "We don't have time for that. Let them complain
through the chain of command." Whoops, excuuse me.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Do you have a Knowledge Officer?
- From: Robert
- Re: Do you have a Knowledge Officer?
- Prev by Date: Re: [OT] Iraq
- Next by Date: Re: Do you have a Knowledge Officer?
- Previous by thread: rounding
- Next by thread: Re: Do you have a Knowledge Officer?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|