4 ms·
> Without Docker everything new becomes a project on its own where you need to call in "ops" for the smallest of things. I hope that one day we will stop echoi
by tuldia 7y ago
> Without Docker everything new becomes a project on its own where you need to call in "ops" for the smallest of things.
I hope that one day we will stop echoing that or framing it as a bad thing.
It's always good to involve people. Writing, build and running software is a shared responsibility.
I truly believe that if you be nice with your ops, explain what you want to achieve, they will help you. It is a two-way street.
It is not a tool that will "fix" how humans interact.
Also, put yourself in their shoes, it could be that:
"With Docker everything new becomes a snowflake on its own where you need to call in "dev" for the smallest of things." -- or uncompress the image and look around how/what a specific image does things when it start, place app/config/data files, etc...
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- lostcolony 7y agoDepends on the incentives placed on ops. All too often, they're responsible to handle things breaking, but not responsible for getting features out the door. Hence, they become a huge gate to get anything out; they have no incentive to help you. Meanwhile, you get dev owning some of the operational burden, and it works pretty well. Until you have compliance needs to separate them.
- etaioinshrdlu 7y agoI remember working at a startup with separate ops and no docker. I just remember it causing a lot of friction and it slowed us down. I see no reason why ops people wouldn't enjoy docker just as much as devs. I found it cleaner on average than system config trackers like ansible or puppet, and could reduce the complexity of your configuration management.
- stjohnswarts 7y agoIf a dev can do it on his own without assistance with minimal issues then having someone to "maintain" the install is just dumb.