I followed our inspection screenshots until the main routine called a subprogram that is absent from the handover. The integrator is still available. I want to trace one bracket through the whole job with our relief maintainer, including what happens when its result is missing.
Start with that missing call. Ask for the matching program package and a list of the external signals it uses. Your screenshots can illustrate it afterwards; they cannot tell your relief maintainer what code was omitted.
The integrator says the subprogram waits for inspection complete and then files the result. There are two similarly named versions in the backup folder. I have asked which one belongs to the installed main routine.
Our inherited backup folder had a final and a final-new. Neither matched the running job. Get the installed package identified first. The filenames were the most confident part of our handover.
And preserve both old copies separately. It is tempting to tidy the folder before anyone has worked out why there are two. You want a known current package, not a neat folder with the evidence thrown away.
Integrator identified the installed package and supplied its matching export. The extra subprogram belongs to an abandoned trial. David, complete means a result was received; acceptance is a field in that result, which the screenshots never show.
Will the relief maintainer get time to work through it before the integrator leaves? Give that person a slot, not an invitation to read it between faults.
Sara's right. We tried the between-faults version. Three weeks later everyone had read page one and the original programmer had moved on. A short booked session would have cost less than the calls afterwards.
We have booked the session. The relief maintainer wants to follow a normal result and a missing result first, then a held bracket. I had only proposed the normal case, so that is already a useful change.
The day lead covered the calls. In the read-through our relief maintainer found the missing-result page told them to clear a request without first establishing whether a result already existed. The integrator has withdrawn that instruction and is correcting the recovery section.
It did after inspection named the disposition owner. The maintainer could explain that the completed inspection did not authorise a held bracket to leave the hold process. The operator page now uses that wording too.
The second read-through passed with the corrected recovery section. We used the agreed offline cases, including an already existing result after an interruption; the maintainer followed the reconciliation and escalation without prompting. Maintenance also verified the current export against the installed package. I've accepted this handover revision.