5 ms·

I can see the argument that if releasing causes things to break then don't release so frequently, but in practice the end result of that is lots of things break

I can see the argument that if releasing causes things to break then don't release so frequently, but in practice the end result of that is lots of things breaking at once and having to unpick everything. Debugging is much easier if you're debugging a single change fresh in your mind.

bryanlarsen 10y ago
Yeah, debugging 2 bugs that are shadowing each other often takes several orders of magnitude longer to debug than just a single issue.
Thrillington 10y ago
While having tooling for tight debugging loops allows short release cycles, it leaves that decision up to the business
asimuvPR 10y ago
You are right. Making small changes that can be isolated for debugging purposes is a good approach. What I mean is that we should always question "best" practices and how we apply them to our development process. These days there is a tendency to drink the kool-aid (guilty of this as well). DevOps is something that we are still learning and developing as a profession.
- dozzie 10y ago
  > DevOps is something that we are still learning and developing as a profession. Not really. DevOps is simply a modernish label for system administration that we have for dozens years already.
  - the_other 10y ago
    Isn't that just "Ops"?
    - dozzie 10y ago
      My point exactly.
      - aurelianito 10y ago
        Yes, but now we actually try to automate in a systematic way; as opposed to a single admin hacking some custom shell scripts. That's what the dev in devop mean. And that's new, at least it was not a common activity in the XX century.
        dozzie 10y ago
        If by "systematic way" you mean a group of programmers clueless about system administration hacking together some custom Ansible scripts, then I wouldn't call it progress. Sysadmins have tools to automate their work for a long, long time (cfengine, bcfg2, even Puppet and Chef predates DevOps hype). DevOps didn't bring anything new to the table.
        aurelianito 10y ago
        Is not about doing it right or wrong. Is about the automation that is reused cross-project and the fact that a lot of things that used to require a sysadmin now we automated its job away. If developers implement it correctly or poorly is a different issue. It is also not about hype (or not). I do agree that the name is posterior to the beginning of the practice, but it is the name that we have.
        dozzie 10y ago
        Being a sysadmin was always about automation. DevOps brought nothing to the table about that. Neither tools nor paradigm. And the name is just another one for "administering systems", if we keep what you seem to mean by DevOps. It's still no progress, hacky scripts written by sysadmins or similarly hacky scripts written by programmers, and systematic way of automating tasks was available to sysadmins and was used by them for a long time. DevOps brought nothing new to the table.

bryanlarsen 10y ago

Yeah, debugging 2 bugs that are shadowing each other often takes several orders of magnitude longer to debug than just a single issue.

Thrillington 10y ago

While having tooling for tight debugging loops allows short release cycles, it leaves that decision up to the business

asimuvPR 10y ago

You are right. Making small changes that can be isolated for debugging purposes is a good approach. What I mean is that we should always question "best" practices and how we apply them to our development process. These days there is a tendency to drink the kool-aid (guilty of this as well). DevOps is something that we are still learning and developing as a profession.

dozzie 10y ago
> DevOps is something that we are still learning and developing as a profession. Not really. DevOps is simply a modernish label for system administration that we have for dozens years already.
- the_other 10y ago
  Isn't that just "Ops"?
  - dozzie 10y ago
    My point exactly.
    - aurelianito 10y ago
      Yes, but now we actually try to automate in a systematic way; as opposed to a single admin hacking some custom shell scripts. That's what the dev in devop mean. And that's new, at least it was not a common activity in the XX century.
      - dozzie 10y ago
        If by "systematic way" you mean a group of programmers clueless about system administration hacking together some custom Ansible scripts, then I wouldn't call it progress. Sysadmins have tools to automate their work for a long, long time (cfengine, bcfg2, even Puppet and Chef predates DevOps hype). DevOps didn't bring anything new to the table.
        aurelianito 10y ago
        Is not about doing it right or wrong. Is about the automation that is reused cross-project and the fact that a lot of things that used to require a sysadmin now we automated its job away. If developers implement it correctly or poorly is a different issue. It is also not about hype (or not). I do agree that the name is posterior to the beginning of the practice, but it is the name that we have.
        dozzie 10y ago
        Being a sysadmin was always about automation. DevOps brought nothing to the table about that. Neither tools nor paradigm. And the name is just another one for "administering systems", if we keep what you seem to mean by DevOps. It's still no progress, hacky scripts written by sysadmins or similarly hacky scripts written by programmers, and systematic way of automating tasks was available to sysadmins and was used by them for a long time. DevOps brought nothing new to the table.