Literally anything breaks
Management: Devs should have tested it
Devs: What the fuck are testers for?

To be fair, some basic tests should be done by the devs.
If you commit something that breaks the product and you could have tested it by simply running it, there is no need to give it to the testers first. It would be a waste of time.
Testers are there to find non obvious problems.

And, CI is there for a reason.

I do agree it's often not reasonable to expect devs to test every little thing though

And the "devrant" tag is for devrant.com stuff, not "developer rant". Every rant is a developer rant because there are only devs here.

@Lensflare I've seen devs for whom it would already be an improvement if they tried to compile before committing. oO

The absence of test errors is not the evidence of absence of errors.

OMG I had this argument so many times with my previous team. There was a guy, who wrote unit tests and considered it done. And by that, I mean he merged his code and didn't even spend 5 mins to fucking go to the DEV environment and look at it with his own fucking eyes. In one case it was so broke, that I had to abandon my "no yelling" wow I made 6 years ago.

@KatatonDzsentri And how did he test? Did he not see code coverage reports? Did he just mock up all the classes?

@nitnip as we're talking about unit tests yeah, mocked classes

@Lensflare I meant the non trivial stuff only

The basic functional testing obviously all devs do

I was talking about the scenarios which testers are for to test.

@YADU agreed!

@Fast-Nop oops first rant! was just testing it out, Will be careful with tags henceforth. thanks!

@KatatonDzsentri haha yeah I have worked with a similar dev who did not even bother to hit the api from postman or any rest client and gave me api spec with all wrong specification. It was a nightmare.