This state agency's IT people are in the process of developing a replacement for a major infrastructure application, reports a pilot fish in the thick of it.
"As part of the current application, there was an interface to two different, but similar, applications from another state agency," fish says. "These two separate applications have very similar names and similar responsibilities, but also pulled information from two different federal agencies.
"During the initial design session for one of the applications, it was decided that the requirements could just be duplicated with a change to the name of the interface and to the different agency and it's similarly named application.
"One of the business analysts was given the responsibility to make the change and submit it.
"The analyst detailed to do this took it upon himself to submit the changed requirements document without anyone reviewing it for accuracy. However, when submitting it to the developers he picked the requirements document where he had renamed the file, but hadn't changed the name of the source application.
"It went directly to the developers -- but a different group than was working from the initial set of requirements.
"End result: We ended up with two interfaces to the same application, only with a slightly different name. It wasn't until the users started their testing that it was discovered."
Let Sharky discover your true tale of IT life. Send it to me at email@example.com. You'll snag a snazzy Shark shirt if I use it. Add your comments below, and read some great old tales in the Sharkives.
Get your daily dose of out-takes from the IT Theater of the Absurd delivered directly to your Inbox. Subscribe now to the Daily Shark Newsletter.