You're talking to an open sores hobbyist who was never actually employed to work on any serious software project.>>71078218>Things move a lot quicker there.
Yeah, GIMP is light years ahead of Photoshop by now. Oh, wait...>Yes we are! That's what I'm working on.
Sure you are, faggot larper.>Maybe it does, but it never is
You're clueless.>Quality is poor, but everyone ignores that because the automatic tests are green and we have test coverage.
This is just more proof you're clueless. Just because you and your team haven't the slightest idea what you're doing, doesn't mean there's no proper way of doing things.
You're relying on automatic tests to improve the quality of your code, when they're really just a small measure to prevent regressions. There are other techniques which you'd call "bureaucracy" and "red tape" (because you're an amateur) that could be employed to improve the quality of your code.
For instance, do you collect any metrics on your code? Do you even have any idea of how many lines of code you have? This is the most basic metric out there. How about defects found per line of code? How about code review yield, do you keep track of that? Percent defects found before testing? Do you keep any track of time spent on anything at all? Do you employ any statistical method to determine how many unfound bugs you still have in any given software component?
Of course you don't, because you're unqualified and unskilled.>But they don't work...
In unskilled hands such as yours, they sure don't.