• expr@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    4 hours ago

    Reviewers are not infallible and are largely focused on the meat of the MR rather than every single detail.

    It reflects much more poorly on you than it does on them.

    • eldavi
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      4 hours ago

      it’s more a reflection of my experience and their stereotypical blind spots:

      the IT work that i did before becoming a developer has taught me to succeed by placing emphasis on delivering on time and with minimal maintainability to the exclusion of everything else and it verbally sits poorly with the more privileged engineers that i work with; but they do the same thing obliviously nonetheless. like you, they make assumptions based on who they think you are without realizing that they’re the same way.

      their insistence that they own all aspects of the peer reviews; plus management’s insistence that we acquiesce to them despite seeing blind spots in the review process; plus their unwillingness to listen to someone who doesn’t fit into the in-group allows for this to happen and i’m only allowed to voice my concerns when prompted to like a soldier in the implicit security example that i shared.

      developers are just a screwy as everyone else and the ones that management help to drink their own bathwater is creating a world where new developers will have to be likewise privileged to even be allowed in, in the future; i know that the ivory tower developers believe that this is a good thing, but this disconnect with reality is fueling the socioeconomic gaps that let people like trump win elections and ruin things for everyone.