Lost in Translation
When nomenclature decisions get left up to the product department, most of whom are Scandinavian, there can be unfortunate ramifications. Just now I innocently asked one of the testers for clarification on an issue involving “a parent DIS agreement with smeared children…” – and briefly wondered why he was cracking up, before realizing what I’d said.
Top marks still go to our very serious developer-in-charge-of-the-build, who last year loudly announced that if there were no objections, he was going to “give head to the testers”. I almost choked on my coffee, but the rest of the team saw nothing funny in it, and received this alarming news with grave nods. You had to be there…
* “head” (as opposed to a “branch”) is the latest version of the project code in the source repository. Yup, development is full of innuendo.
Top marks still go to our very serious developer-in-charge-of-the-build, who last year loudly announced that if there were no objections, he was going to “give head to the testers”. I almost choked on my coffee, but the rest of the team saw nothing funny in it, and received this alarming news with grave nods. You had to be there…
* “head” (as opposed to a “branch”) is the latest version of the project code in the source repository. Yup, development is full of innuendo.
posted by Thor Harley at 2:38 pm
1 Comments:
What 37991-7828-2 is talking about here is a design meeting some years back at our then employer, where he asserted that such-and-such a screen was "edible" and such-and-such feature was "non-edible". Everyone else's brains unconsciously contextualised this to "editable" and a "non-editable", but I found myself having to closely inspect something on the carpet for quite some time before trusting myself to re-join the discussion.
Post a Comment
<< Home