News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

throwaway98988

Apologies for the wrong thread title. I meant "Have you ever". Sometimes I read stuff over and over and over and still reads fine but is wrong. Oh well, sorry.
That's exactly one of the problems that I have. Somehow people are okay with things taking 2 years rather than 3 months though so there isn't a lot of pressure to change.

I'm at a point where I don't know if sticking around can have a positive influence on my career, maybe I'll learn to be more zen? How will that help if I change jobs? Or, will I become used to bad engineering and sabotage myself in the future? These are the kind of questions I'm having.

Assuming I have a good set of skills and enough experience, when faced with a challenging situation like this, I should try to be a positive force and bring improvements. However, I'm failing at that constantly and I just think it could have a negative impact on myself (burnout is a fact at this point).

Really trying to find the silver lining in all of this.

There's a certain disdain for metrics so we're not tracking a lot of things proactively (think latency/rate, for example). That means every new change is based on a feeling of how it'll impact the systems. We also don't have a dev/test environment so changes to production are what I'd call, "faith based". There's a lot of apply to production, revert cycles. Or worse: no changes at all for fear of breaking things.

But there are more mundane things like not using a code linter because $linter enforces some rule that someone doesn't like, so discussions stall. There are literally hundreds of JIRA tickets about some proposed idea that fails to reach consensus.

I think isolating myself from the craziness is a good idea but I'm having trouble with how it would be received. Say I push a code change that fixes a bunch of things that $linter complained about, including stylistic changes. Now that has to be reviewed by someone and...? Should I just keep pushing the envelope like that? Someone will probably contribute some piece of code full of violations and then... I fix it and cause an incident with teammates?

One possible outcome is to just accept things and let go. I see this a lot in people that have been here for many years. They are also not people I would aspire to be so... I kind of have to accept defeat but that's demoralizing. I'm coming to a point where I'm asking myself where I could be and I don't have a good answer. Should I stick around and keep trying to change things? Back to the swimming against the current question.

Thanks for all the feedback.

Re:On Being a Principal Engineer on Sunday February 10, 2019 @05:23PM (#19130484)
Unfortunately, I have to agree. I've been hired into an informal "staff/principal" role for my part of the organization and it's simply impossible to work. The other staff/principal engineers I see here are exactly how you describe. They are against anything that will make their roles as "the oracle" less important.

Documentation is such a mess because of that and the onboarding process specifically says there are a lot of "oral history" newcomers have to learn before doing anything meaningful.

Re:On Being a Principal Engineer on Sunday February 10, 2019 @05:19PM (#19130460)
What should a staff/principal engineer do if company culture is against change?

Posted a related question here, if that's a better place to discuss this question: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19130451

Ask HN: How you ever quit because the engineering culture is too messed up?

I work with nice people but my technical ideas are constantly shot down because either 1) "that's not how we do things there", 2) "there are more important things to worry about", or 3) "I'm not sure I like it".I realize different organizations need different people/experiences but I see some obvious errors in management infrastructure and I'm trying to be not-pushy as much as possible while...

( Read More... | 22 comments | 23 points | on HN )