Meursault wrote on Aug 30
th, 2013 at 12:34pm:
Why was that code in the Maintenance stream to begin with? Clearly that belongs in the Development stream. You guys use a Code Versioning System that supports Branch and Merge operations, right? Or do you work only in a single trunk and Rollback is all you've left yourselves?
Getting chocolate in your peanut butter is funny and tasty, getting development code in your maintenance code means you can neither develop nor maintain well.
This is why we can't have nice things.
Maj, I feel your pain. I'm a software developer and I've been in shops where QA is an afterthought, and is resented by developers. I suspect you take crap at both ends - from us here and from the people at Turbine who want the warm fuzzy feeling of doing a good job without the actual work of doing a good job (not that they all fall in that class). I don't know if it will help you, but while I was going through the Certified Quality Engineer certification process I came across a quote that I've successfully used to justify bringing QA in early on my projects, maybe it will help you get a say earlier in the process there.
The quote is by Harold Dodge but Deming made it famous, "You cannot inspect quality into a product. The quality is there or it isn't by the time it's inspected."
Good luck, and thanks for not just giving up.
Nice post mate!
All the evidence suggests that they don't have very good
control over dev and release streams. You'd need to be a
millipede to 'finger count' how many times they've polluted
the release tree with dev code and been unable to back
it out. Given the number of features that are DOA, I question
whether they have any integration process at all.