they shouldn’t have to do that. the commit log tells the manager who to go ask.
and since the developer did that to be a big swinging dick instead of bringing it up to the team in a meeting as a problem to address together the manager didn’t trust them.
makes sense to people that have to manage other humans.
This is a massive assumption from the story that was provided. We don’t know that they didn’t discuss with the team and an explanation of “I added a log to errors that were already happening” shouldn’t result in lack of trust from the manager.
Reactive managers like that are a big problem in the industry.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !programmerhumor@lemmy.ml
Post funny things about programming here! (Or just rant about your favourite programming language.)
Rules:
Posts must be relevant to programming, programmers, or computer science.
No NSFW content.
Jokes must be in good taste. No hate speech, bigotry, etc.
A manager that can’t read a simple try catch commit? Why am I surprised.
they shouldn’t have to do that. the commit log tells the manager who to go ask.
and since the developer did that to be a big swinging dick instead of bringing it up to the team in a meeting as a problem to address together the manager didn’t trust them.
makes sense to people that have to manage other humans.
This is a massive assumption from the story that was provided. We don’t know that they didn’t discuss with the team and an explanation of “I added a log to errors that were already happening” shouldn’t result in lack of trust from the manager.
Reactive managers like that are a big problem in the industry.