3 ms·

Why is your productivity more valuable than the Ops/SRE team that probably costs the company more to employ?

by yuppie_scum 5y ago

manuelabeledo 5y ago
It may not be. It all depends on how much value you put on resilience and quality in software. Again, a sleep deprived developer has a higher chance of making mistakes, than a rested one. But I have heard your argument before, and it kind of rings hollow. Unless you are willing to allow developers to push changes to production in the middle of the night and without supervision, what exactly is the benefit of having them on-call? Saving money?
- yuppie_scum 5y ago
  What exactly is the benefit of having a non developer on call who has no fucking clue what the problem is because they didn’t write the code, they don’t know the AC’s, etc? That doesn’t save any money or productivity either. Your point is correct thought that the responder does need the ability to make a hot fix. Non actionable alerts are of negative value to the company. You should read The Phoenix Project, that will help you understand the rationale.
  - manuelabeledo 5y ago
    > You should read The Phoenix Project, that will help you understand the rationale. What makes you think I haven't read it? When my company went through its so called "devops transformation", first thing our devops advocate did was giving away a dozen or so copies. I understand the rationale. I just happen to not agree with it. In my mind, it's naive to believe that a team would have more than two or three competent coders, with a thorough knowledge of the code base, the high level vision of where that code fits and interacts with the rest of the infrastructure, the skills to quickly fix things, and, on top of that, the willing to be on-call several days a month. And then there is the fact that nobody looks for solutions at 2am, just workarounds.

3 ms·

Why is your productivity more valuable than the Ops/SRE team that probably costs the company more to employ?

by yuppie_scum 5y ago

Why is your productivity more valuable than the Ops/SRE team that probably costs the company more to employ?

manuelabeledo 5y ago
It may not be. It all depends on how much value you put on resilience and quality in software. Again, a sleep deprived developer has a higher chance of making mistakes, than a rested one. But I have heard your argument before, and it kind of rings hollow. Unless you are willing to allow developers to push changes to production in the middle of the night and without supervision, what exactly is the benefit of having them on-call? Saving money?
- yuppie_scum 5y ago
  What exactly is the benefit of having a non developer on call who has no fucking clue what the problem is because they didn’t write the code, they don’t know the AC’s, etc? That doesn’t save any money or productivity either. Your point is correct thought that the responder does need the ability to make a hot fix. Non actionable alerts are of negative value to the company. You should read The Phoenix Project, that will help you understand the rationale.
  - manuelabeledo 5y ago
    > You should read The Phoenix Project, that will help you understand the rationale. What makes you think I haven't read it? When my company went through its so called "devops transformation", first thing our devops advocate did was giving away a dozen or so copies. I understand the rationale. I just happen to not agree with it. In my mind, it's naive to believe that a team would have more than two or three competent coders, with a thorough knowledge of the code base, the high level vision of where that code fits and interacts with the rest of the infrastructure, the skills to quickly fix things, and, on top of that, the willing to be on-call several days a month. And then there is the fact that nobody looks for solutions at 2am, just workarounds.