I once worked at a place where they announced they were going to start evaluating performance reviews based on number of bugs closed. But the very devs who were responsible for closing the bug reports were also responsible for finding the bugs and opening the bug reports.
Worked with a Japanese company has this and they refused to acknowledge anything as a bug if it didn’t get discussed in the spec. Oh, this new feature does not interact with the old feature well, just a limitation. Write that up as a new feature. It was killer trying to assign anything as a bug for this reason since you could only get them to fix stuff that explicitly contradicted their Japanese spec.
I once worked at a place where they announced they were going to start evaluating performance reviews based on number of bugs closed. But the very devs who were responsible for closing the bug reports were also responsible for finding the bugs and opening the bug reports.
That policy didn’t last very long.
Worked with a Japanese company has this and they refused to acknowledge anything as a bug if it didn’t get discussed in the spec. Oh, this new feature does not interact with the old feature well, just a limitation. Write that up as a new feature. It was killer trying to assign anything as a bug for this reason since you could only get them to fix stuff that explicitly contradicted their Japanese spec.
“Oh, IntellIJ tells me there are 5 warnings in this code. Guess I’m gonna open 5 reports! Refactored the code, closed 5 reports, ez.”