Dev: Breaks unit tests

Same dev: Merges it to master anyway

Same fucking dev: Can't merge to master coz CI is screaming at you? Merge locally and FORCE push.

Me: Hi, I'm blocked. I can't merge to master coz of this failing test, can we get on a quick call and figure this out?

Same fucking fuckface dev: *after 3 fucking days* Yeah, I don't know why it's failing.. the results seem to be inconsistent..

Jesus Christ. I am so close to leaving this side-project because of the frequent shit I have to go through with this fucking idiot.

God I wish I didn't need the money.

I am interested to buy your side-project.

@jassole
> I am interested to buy your side-project.

- every silicon valley hipster VC

Maybe put yourself in a more senior mentality and educate him on the usefulness of unit tests?

@Azlon Lulz. What do you think I wanted to get on that call for?

Force push not blocked ? Also, fire this guy

@Lyniven Unfortunately not blocked, I've brought this up with their CEO multiple times and the devs keep bringing up bs cases where maintainer access is needed to make them "work faster".

They're pretty tight knit so he keeps giving them a pass. It's all political bullshit which I don't want to get into as they are not worth the stress.

@Angry Force push if allowed should only be allowed on feature branches that in turn must build and pass all tests before allowing merge.

And any excuse for needing force push in main is most likely due to it being available.

I have been part of one single force push in main during 8 years or more of using git and that time all other pushes and merges was disabled while we sorted out the mess requiring the force push and it never happened again.

It was due to not preventing broken merges.

@Voxera On gitlab they still don't have granular control on force pushes. So it's either enabled or disabled.

These guys are all set to have maintainer access anyway so they'd still have the option to disable it. And in the six months I'm been working with this team, I've brought this up 3 times, each time they were given a pass to keep it enabled.

When I started there was no CI and no tests. I built the CI, I built the foundation for the test suites (and A LOT of the actual unit tests), and I have also spent hours educating these fools on TDD even when I'm never one for presentations.

I think it's safe to say I've done all I could for this team. I'll keep bringing this up on retro but I'm done doing any more than that.

@Angry basically what you are telling me is that your boss is incompetent, alright

@Angry I think your colleagues are failing to understand why the tests are so helpful. For them it probably seems like you're shoving it down their throats which in return makes them not wanna do it

You need to make them want to do this not have them do it because YOU want them too.

I wouldn't wanna do something just because someone else wants it so much either

@Angry gitlab supports that perfectly well. Only thing you need to do is make select branches protected. Rest will be able to be force pushed.

Also no protection means you can just force push your branch and all the tests work again!!!

@ThatPerlDeb I was brought in initially to setup a smoother deploy process before me they were deploying from their local machines. Of course there was a big presentation about testing and how the CI works.

CEO and CTO obviously wanted this to happen but not so much that their precious devs would be "hindered".

@hjk101 - master branch already is protected but maintainers still have force push access to it. The removal of this access (or better yet, demoting their access to developer) is what I have been lobbying for.

I (sincerely) like how everyone here thinks I need advice, but no, this was just a rant.

@Angry I think it was not do much advice in why but more arguments you might use to convince those in power why ;)

@Angry ah misunderstood you there. Thought you didn't know how to set it up.

No amount of advice is going to help you if the powers to be is your opponent. It's a good rant!

In previous team seniors also had the override. Never used it but we had it to be able to fix a fuck-up. Revert in 5 secs when despite tests something is wrong in production, or some merge/rebase issue (fix history). But holy hell use that power to push broken shit would have warranted a serious discussion and one for our of the door.