> But then other folks would give a play-by-play of what they did and how, and what they will do next and how they will do it.
Saw a principal engineer do that. He would take what could be summarized in a sentence or two and spend 5+ minutes describing it.
Same guy once rejected a PR and made me initialize a field to null instead of empty string, his rationalization is that he's been both a DBA and a developer over his 7 year career, so he knows better. than apparently the entire industry that's been moving away from code like that for the last 10+ years.
yes, you read that right. 7 years, not all of it in software dev, working as a principal engineer.
> take what could be summarized in a sentence or two and spend 5+ minutes describing it
Don't hate the player, hate the game. I had a job that required weekly status updates by e-mail (cc-ed to the entire team for some reason). My updates went on for pages. If somebody asked me to look at something and it took more than 10 minutes, that went on my status report: "Worked with so-and-so to do such-and-such"). My boss confided in me that could tell what I was doing and he appreciated it. Why? Because he summarized those statuses into a big, long (the longer the better) update e-mail to his boss.
If you incentivize stupidity, you're going to get stupidity, even from smart people. Especially from smart people.
Saw a principal engineer do that. He would take what could be summarized in a sentence or two and spend 5+ minutes describing it.
Same guy once rejected a PR and made me initialize a field to null instead of empty string, his rationalization is that he's been both a DBA and a developer over his 7 year career, so he knows better. than apparently the entire industry that's been moving away from code like that for the last 10+ years.
yes, you read that right. 7 years, not all of it in software dev, working as a principal engineer.
politics are a bitch sometimes.