3 ms·

This is mostly a cost saving technique that companies quietly incorporated as if it is quite normal. Anybody who complained or criticized were branded as not be

This is mostly a cost saving technique that companies quietly incorporated as if it is quite normal. Anybody who complained or criticized were branded as not being team players or being old-school. Companies found a way to get rid of operations team and had developers do the same thing without paying them extra. Well, there are some companies like Google who pay for being on-call, but the vast majority does not. So you end up having to cancel your weekend hike when you're on-call, you know, just in case something blows up. You get woken up in the middle of the night to look at an issue which could be in some part of the system you are not familiar with. But who care, this is progress, right? Right? But there is an upside to the devops model. Now developers think through the part after the code has been deployed, they care about the debuggability, about resilience, and logging correctly and all those things which they casually glossed over before. To summarize, in my opinion, being on-call is okay as long as you get paid extra for it, otherwise you're just being used. Have a good day!

shoo 5y ago
> Anybody who complained or criticized were branded as not being team players or being old-school truly being a team player would be to realise the team identity does not include the company but is instead built around professional identity as fellow bit-gardening day labourers who exchange their time and energy providing engineering and operations services to the owners of the company in exchange for money -- then banding together collectively (perhaps starting a union?) to increase negotiating power to obtain better pay and working conditions if anyone has a particularly pithy response to "you build it, you run it" along the lines of "if you'll pay both of my invoices for performing both jobs, OK", i'd love to hear it
manuelabeledo 5y ago
> Anybody who complained or criticized were branded as not being team players or being old-school. This, plus "you build it, you run it", which I don't agree with, given that most mid to large sized companies run devops teams, effectively hiding infrastructure details from developers.

shoo 5y ago

> Anybody who complained or criticized were branded as not being team players or being old-school truly being a team player would be to realise the team identity does not include the company but is instead built around professional identity as fellow bit-gardening day labourers who exchange their time and energy providing engineering and operations services to the owners of the company in exchange for money -- then banding together collectively (perhaps starting a union?) to increase negotiating power to obtain better pay and working conditions if anyone has a particularly pithy response to "you build it, you run it" along the lines of "if you'll pay both of my invoices for performing both jobs, OK", i'd love to hear it

manuelabeledo 5y ago

> Anybody who complained or criticized were branded as not being team players or being old-school. This, plus "you build it, you run it", which I don't agree with, given that most mid to large sized companies run devops teams, effectively hiding infrastructure details from developers.