Online Testing Error Reporting POC?

[a2capt]

I just got a notice form eServices:

Please DO NOT reply to this automated email message.[/size]

123321 - Fred W. Flintstone (BR-666) has completed an online test.
Test Name:
Test Status:
Test Score: 0


Thank you!

[/size]CAP NHQ Staff

... and the cadet sent me a screen shot right away, telling me he looked and saw no recorded entry,  (SOP, I tell them to screen shot it, look to see if it was recorded, and if not, give me that)

[coudano]

i got a simliar one the  other day,
it's been reported and is in the pipeline

[davidsinn]

I just got a notice form eServices:

Please DO NOT reply to this automated email message.

123321 - Fred W. Flintstone (BR-666) has completed an online test.
Test Name:
Test Status:
Test Score: 0


Thank you!

CAP NHQ Staff

... and the cadet sent me a screen shot right away, telling me he looked and saw no recorded entry,  (SOP, I tell them to screen shot it, look to see if it was recorded, and if not, give me that)

Is that the exact email you got or did you scrub personally identifiables when you posted?

[SarDragon]

Knowing our a2 guy as I do, that's a definite scrub job. Also, I doubt that any cadet would have a 123 number. That was issued pre-conversion.

[AngelWings]

Is this the same Fred W. Flinstone?

[davidsinn]

What I was wondering is if the testing system was tossing out garbage output for some reason or if it's sending the email as usual but not recording the results.

[a2capt]

Same last three lines. The Cadet was changed to protect the innocent.
No test name, no test status, A zero score.

[davidsinn]

Same last three lines. The Cadet was changed to protect the innocent.
No test name, no test status, A zero score.

OK. Not that it makes a difference to me because I can't do any thing to fix it

[Extremepredjudice]

https://capnhq.crmdesk.com/home.aspx
Shontica Padgett ext 290


http://capmembers.com/cap_national_hq/nhq-contacts/

[Rogovin]

Lets see... National is doing updates on eServices.  They mentioned a new testing system, and other things (NCSA's, DDRx, etc.)  I'd be willing to bet that has something to do with it.  Just wait until the 6th and im sure it will be OK.

-Rogovin

[Extremepredjudice]

updates shouldn't be tested/build on the live version. If they ARE doing it on the live version, the lead programmer deserves to be canned.

It should be done on either a testing server or offline.

[Eclipse]

All IT implementations are tests. 

[a2capt]

All IT implementations are tests.

That is soooo right. The notice about the changes coming, the part about the testing application retaining the [X] Old or New tick box is almost not even worth mentioning. Like that would have been expected anyway.

[Paul Creed III]

I have been in contact with NHQ IT about the issue, along with the issue I have seen about getting multiple copies of the same results email.

And, there is a test eServices environment. I helped test the cadet promotions module back when the new leadership curriculum was introduced.

[Extremepredjudice]

All IT implementations are tests.

Sir with all due respect,

You don't screw around with source code that people are using. It is stupid. Programmer 101.

You end up with an unorganized mess.

[Phil Hirons, Jr.]

And in Programmer 501 you learn sometimes a "hotfix" on your productions systems is the only option.

[Extremepredjudice]

And in Programmer 501 you learn sometimes a "hotfix" on your productions systems is the only option.

Not for a scheduled update.


Scheduled updates = testing
emergency/hotfixes=pushed immediately

[Phil Hirons, Jr.]

Agreed.

[Extremepredjudice]

Agreed.

Well this is a scheduled update.

Assuming the NHQ IT team is smart enough not to work on an update on the live source code, the problem is a bug. Not because of the update.

[EMT-83]

Those of old enough to remember life prior to computers tend to get less excited about such things.

[Spaceman3750]

Agreed.

Well this is a scheduled update.

Assuming the NHQ IT team is smart enough not to work on an update on the live source code, the problem is a bug. Not because of the update.

You know, you should cut them some slack cadet. The last 6 months of my day job have been a vivid example of things working perfectly fine in testing and going to hell in production (by the way, I make my living in IT). Maybe, just maybe, someone made an honest mistake or Mr. Murphy came out to play.

[Phil Hirons, Jr.]

Agreed.

Well this is a scheduled update.

Assuming the NHQ IT team is smart enough not to work on an update on the live source code, the problem is a bug. Not because of the update.

You know, you should cut them some slack cadet. The last 6 months of my day job have been a vivid example of things working perfectly fine in testing and going to hell in production (by the way, I make my living in IT). Maybe, just maybe, someone made an honest mistake or Mr. Murphy came out to play.

:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

Mr Murphy has an employee id in my it shop.

[Spaceman3750]

Agreed.

Well this is a scheduled update.

Assuming the NHQ IT team is smart enough not to work on an update on the live source code, the problem is a bug. Not because of the update.

You know, you should cut them some slack cadet. The last 6 months of my day job have been a vivid example of things working perfectly fine in testing and going to hell in production (by the way, I make my living in IT). Maybe, just maybe, someone made an honest mistake or Mr. Murphy came out to play.

:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

Mr Murphy has an employee id in my it shop.

Where I work he holds a director slot (not kidding either, there's a guy named Mr. Murphy who is a director).

EDIT: Just checked my inbox, testing emails were working correctly as of Feb 27. Something between now and then got fubar'ed.

[AngelWings]

One small mess up and some people want to crucify them! They do a great job. Every website is bound to have one or two minor problems here or there.

[coudano]

Agreed.

Well this is a scheduled update.

Assuming the NHQ IT team is smart enough not to work on an update on the live source code, the problem is a bug. Not because of the update.

You know, you should cut them some slack cadet. The last 6 months of my day job have been a vivid example of things working perfectly fine in testing and going to hell in production (by the way, I make my living in IT). Maybe, just maybe, someone made an honest mistake or Mr. Murphy came out to play.

You know, that's nice and everything, but blown up production has consequences.
Even in the "real world".

In CAP cadets and their parents start getting frustrated with the system and stop trying.
Already seen a little bit of that.

If I blew up a production run at my job (and didn't fix it post haste, or roll back to the prior stable in a jiffy), i'd probably get fired.  I work in IT too.

In my other job, if I blow up a production run somebody might die.  Kind of hard to roll that back.

[MSG Mac]

Agreed.

Well this is a scheduled update.

Assuming the NHQ IT team is smart enough not to work on an update on the live source code, the problem is a bug. Not because of the update.

You know, you should cut them some slack cadet. The last 6 months of my day job have been a vivid example of things working perfectly fine in testing and going to hell in production (by the way, I make my living in IT). Maybe, just maybe, someone made an honest mistake or Mr. Murphy came out to play.

You know, that's nice and everything, but blown up production has consequences.
Even in the "real world".

In CAP cadets and their parents start getting frustrated with the system and stop trying.
Already seen a little bit of that.

If I blew up a production run at my job (and didn't fix it post haste, or roll back to the prior stable in a jiffy), i'd probably get fired.  I work in IT too.

In my other job, if I blow up a production run somebody might die.  Kind of hard to roll that back.

The reality is that there are several options available to those who are inconvenienced by the temporary outage.
1,. They can take the hard copy tests which are available at their units.
2. They can ask the Testing Officer to download the test for them.
3. They can take a chill pill, until the site is back in operation.

By the way the IT crew at National consists of about 5 people, who have over the last five years completely renovated the way we do business. Milestones are posted immediately, rather than waiting several weeks for the recorder to check every line of the applicable certifications.
Cadet advanceements can be tracked online
SM promotions can be done online
Most reports can be filed on line. 
ad infinitum.

[Extremepredjudice]

Agreed.

Well this is a scheduled update.

Assuming the NHQ IT team is smart enough not to work on an update on the live source code, the problem is a bug. Not because of the update.

You know, you should cut them some slack cadet. The last 6 months of my day job have been a vivid example of things working perfectly fine in testing and going to hell in production (by the way, I make my living in IT). Maybe, just maybe, someone made an honest mistake or Mr. Murphy came out to play.

You may think of me as some script kiddie, but I'm not.

I've worked in the industry. I've held jobs at large corporations doing web design and programming. If you want I could give you my pertanent job history, but I'd doubt  it would matter.

Sorry for your product not working properly. Maybe reevaluating testing procedures? Adding beta testers? I don't know.

But to redress you: Sir, I said "assuming they are smart enough not to."

I don't know what this means in you personal lexicon, but to me it means, I think they wouldn't really do X.

In example: Assuming the astronauts are smart enough not to jump out an airlock, they will probably not die of exposure. (That is an example. Let's not argue about it) I personally have more faith in them to think they jumped out an airlock. I think we will all find common ground that hard vacuum isn't good for you in the long-term.

IF (AND I MEAN IF) they are working on the source code in use, than I would have to lower my opinion of their skill. That is my personal opinion.

P.S. I knew this'd happen. 

[jimmydeanno]

Programmers are limited by the systems that they're given to work on.

If you could see the logic diagram for e-services you'd probably barf.  There is also the possibility that they don't have space on their current systems to have a "test" version of e-services, or haven't had the opportunity to create one yet.

My last job was at an enterprise networking research and development company.  They did awesome creating test environments for our router/switch source codes, etc, but it took a while to get a test environment for our logistics software and order management systems. 

NHQ has limited resources, both in system capability and in manpower.  The folks are probably squeezing in the updates between having to do all the other IT related stuff (my computer won't turn on...).

[Extremepredjudice]

Uh-huh.

Go to some free hosting website. Ias3.com is as good as any.
Password protect site root
Profit.

Yeah, ok maybe it isn't backed up, but use skydrive for a backup.