Re:CDC website built by Deloitte at a cost of $44M is abando...
by Aeolun on Sunday January 31, 2021 @07:42AM
(#25978381)
To be fair, this sounds like someone having a hard time saying you should apply the money sent to the entire balance.
Re:CDC website built by Deloitte at a cost of $44M is abando...
by ethbr0 on Sunday January 31, 2021 @09:34AM
(#25979080)
Nope. That's pretty much what the specs (written by outsourced consultants) said.
In reality, there's one edge case where things needs to be applied in a different, distinct, and very specific order, otherwise (legal consequences).
Re:CDC website built by Deloitte at a cost of $44M is abando...
by Aeolun on Sunday January 31, 2021 @05:32PM
(#25983263)
Yeah, this is probably just my lack of context around the subject.
That said, if I get requirements like that I always have a strong feeling the case can be generalized. Laws generally aren’t as specific as that.
If money is left over, apply to the next available item via (logic).
Unless money is sent twice, for two separate sub-items on the same item, in which case if the first amount is insufficient to cover the entirety of the first sub-item, the excess (if any) from the second amount, after being applied to the second sub-item, must be applied to the remainder of the first sub-item.
There are legal ramifications of doing the first way, without the second. And only the actual in-the-trenches people were able to tell us about the second.
Using outsourced process documentation is @&$&ing useless.