3 ms·

Oh man, I wish most of this would go away. RE: Agile 'We have to find a new way to discuss the idea that maybe we focus on the working software and not on th

Oh man, I wish most of this would go away. RE: Agile 'We have to find a new way to discuss the idea that maybe we focus on the working software and not on the organisational bureaucracy, and that way does not involve the word…' Which is rather hilarious, because the only people I ever hear use the word agile are the beaurocrats. RE: DevOps, I still don't know what it actually means. When I first heard the term, it was used to tell us that us developers need to do our own operations. And we did. Cool. Then it turned into 'developers need to work with the operations people.' Wait what is this just a mantra or something? Now it's just a fancy word for 'sysadmin', apparently? I'd probably add 'microservice' or even 'service' to the list. It's become extremely apparent that very few people have any idea what they're doing or trying to express in that realm.

fishbacon 4y ago
DevOps has in my experience become full stack + server maintenance + misc tool development.
- silisili 4y ago
  At my company, it's now just a term for the person who has full AWS access.
  - quickthrower2 4y ago
    Opsec hates devops!
    - Viliam1234 4y ago
      DevSecOps hate themselves
- jstx1 4y ago
  Not really fullstack if you ask me, more like deployment tools + cloud infrastructure maybe with a bit of glue code sprinkled in.
- peacemaker 4y ago
  I recently moved from software dev to devops and this sounds about right! I'm supposed to understand the product teams entire codebase, write the tooling, create/update terraform for the infra, implement CI/CD stuff plus act as some kind of IT guy with AWS access. Don't get me wrong, it makes a nice change from pure development, but it's clear that in most places, 'DevOps' is not so clearly defined.
  - Dudeman112 4y ago
    I for one am rather fond of just calling it "one man IT department" or a "generalist" (for whatever reason it looks like this has become a dirty word lately)
    - Angostura 4y ago
      Sounds like a previous job where I was informally titled 'Head of stuff'
  - spoiler 4y ago
    Yeah, likewise. Alongside that I'm also expected to do backend development. I feel like I'm allowed no downtime or get any "easy wins". I wonder if that can quicken burn out onset
- dagw 4y ago
  Where I worked at least, DevOps didn't do anything "full stack" and had nothing to do with the developing or maintaining of any of the actual code that got deployed. They where responsible for working with the developers to come up with the best solution for having a secure and fast way for deploying and running an application. Sometimes they would help write custom deployment scripts or come with suggestions on how to make things easier from a deployment and/or performance point of view, but they never actually touched the code in any way.
- pjmlp 4y ago
  On my experience it is rebraded sysadmins.
falcor84 4y ago
Regarding DevOps, a major aim was to embed operational concerns into all stages of development. In that sense, it was a massive success; a developer cannot anymore just say "here's a binary that I made on my machine, make it work in production", throw it towards ops and sign off.
- manuelabeledo 4y ago
  > Regarding DevOps, a major aim was to embed operational concerns into all stages of development. In that sense, it was a massive success... I strongly disagree here. If it was such a success, then why are there devops jobs at all? If it was meant to signify that developers should share responsibility on deployments and integrations, what's the role of a "devops engineer"? It seems to me that self-proclaimed devops practitioners tend to draw lines to limit their responsibility in the software building process, which is also counterproductive.
  - falcor84 4y ago
    >devops practitioners tend to draw lines to limit their responsibility in the software building process I'd say you hit the nail on the head here. I would agree that DevOps does indeed stem from operations folks saying that they don't want full responsibility for how software runs in production, instead introducing tooling and processes to force more of these concerns onto devs. As to terminology, "DevOps engineers" are ops engineers who adhere to this approach (or being a bit cynical, those who just have familiarity with relevant tooling and like the sound of that term). And as to whether this is productive or not, I would argue that it's made the individual developer somewhat less productive on the metric of "writing code", but the overall organization more productive on the metric of "deploying working code that serves users".
  - hgsgm 4y ago
  - throwaway5959 4y ago
    DevOps is like what happened to DBAs, now devs get to do another role while still being responsible for their other roles without extra compensation while eliminating a whole job (ops or dba).
mrex 4y ago
DevOps is a sysadmin who doesn't own his infrastructure, mixed with a developer who doesn't own his code.
- silisili 4y ago
  "So, what would you say you do here?"
rwky 4y ago
I've been hired for multiple DevOps roles. For me it means Syadmin (happy Syadmin day btw) but also responsible for managing the plethora of AWS etc service, CI/CD pipelines, dealing with security audits, the occasional diving into code for back end stuff and being on hand for advice/comments.
- hgsgm 4y ago
AndyMcConachie 4y ago
About 20 years ago I had a job where I was called an 'Integration Engineer'. It would be called Dev Ops now. It will be called something different in 20 years. Who cares?
quickthrower2 4y ago
I thought devops was the cattle not pets mentality. Script all the things. Then CI. Then Terraform. Not necessarily that tool, but that class of solution.
AlexB138 4y ago
> When I first heard the term, it was used to tell us that us developers need to do our own operations. And we did. Cool. That is not at all what it ever meant, and is very much the opposite of the original meaning. For what it's worth, I personally think this is probably the best approach now though. > Then it turned into 'developers need to work with the operations people.' Wait what is this just a mantra or something? This is sort of it. Calling it a "mantra" is fine, but it was meant to be a cultural shift. It was actually pretty successful, which I think is why most people are a little mystified as to what it was originally about. It has become just the way things are done, so it is difficult to recognize as a change. Back before this change started to happen, developers and operations teams used to be much much more divided. They rarely spoke to each other until applications were preparing for release, and then it was the dreaded "throw it over the wall". Operators didn't want devs touching their environments and breaking things. Developers didn't want anything to do with production, because once the code was released their job was done. The whole idea was to align these incentives, and to modernize Operations (which was frankly very stuck in old mindsets). > Now it's just a fancy word for 'sysadmin', apparently? This is what people mean when they say "if you are hiring 'DevOps engineers' you're doing it wrong". Anyways, it's basically a dead phrase. If you've been in the industry less than 15 years or so, it's basically meaningless to you. The movement it came from achieved its goals so well that it no longer has any useful meaning. It now just serves as a way to nerdsnipe people who were there into explaining what it actually meant.

fishbacon 4y ago

DevOps has in my experience become full stack + server maintenance + misc tool development.

silisili 4y ago
At my company, it's now just a term for the person who has full AWS access.
- quickthrower2 4y ago
  Opsec hates devops!
  - Viliam1234 4y ago
    DevSecOps hate themselves
jstx1 4y ago
Not really fullstack if you ask me, more like deployment tools + cloud infrastructure maybe with a bit of glue code sprinkled in.
peacemaker 4y ago
I recently moved from software dev to devops and this sounds about right! I'm supposed to understand the product teams entire codebase, write the tooling, create/update terraform for the infra, implement CI/CD stuff plus act as some kind of IT guy with AWS access. Don't get me wrong, it makes a nice change from pure development, but it's clear that in most places, 'DevOps' is not so clearly defined.
- Dudeman112 4y ago
  I for one am rather fond of just calling it "one man IT department" or a "generalist" (for whatever reason it looks like this has become a dirty word lately)
  - Angostura 4y ago
    Sounds like a previous job where I was informally titled 'Head of stuff'
- spoiler 4y ago
  Yeah, likewise. Alongside that I'm also expected to do backend development. I feel like I'm allowed no downtime or get any "easy wins". I wonder if that can quicken burn out onset
dagw 4y ago
Where I worked at least, DevOps didn't do anything "full stack" and had nothing to do with the developing or maintaining of any of the actual code that got deployed. They where responsible for working with the developers to come up with the best solution for having a secure and fast way for deploying and running an application. Sometimes they would help write custom deployment scripts or come with suggestions on how to make things easier from a deployment and/or performance point of view, but they never actually touched the code in any way.
pjmlp 4y ago
On my experience it is rebraded sysadmins.

falcor84 4y ago

Regarding DevOps, a major aim was to embed operational concerns into all stages of development. In that sense, it was a massive success; a developer cannot anymore just say "here's a binary that I made on my machine, make it work in production", throw it towards ops and sign off.

manuelabeledo 4y ago
> Regarding DevOps, a major aim was to embed operational concerns into all stages of development. In that sense, it was a massive success... I strongly disagree here. If it was such a success, then why are there devops jobs at all? If it was meant to signify that developers should share responsibility on deployments and integrations, what's the role of a "devops engineer"? It seems to me that self-proclaimed devops practitioners tend to draw lines to limit their responsibility in the software building process, which is also counterproductive.
- falcor84 4y ago
  >devops practitioners tend to draw lines to limit their responsibility in the software building process I'd say you hit the nail on the head here. I would agree that DevOps does indeed stem from operations folks saying that they don't want full responsibility for how software runs in production, instead introducing tooling and processes to force more of these concerns onto devs. As to terminology, "DevOps engineers" are ops engineers who adhere to this approach (or being a bit cynical, those who just have familiarity with relevant tooling and like the sound of that term). And as to whether this is productive or not, I would argue that it's made the individual developer somewhat less productive on the metric of "writing code", but the overall organization more productive on the metric of "deploying working code that serves users".
- hgsgm 4y ago
- throwaway5959 4y ago
  DevOps is like what happened to DBAs, now devs get to do another role while still being responsible for their other roles without extra compensation while eliminating a whole job (ops or dba).

mrex 4y ago

DevOps is a sysadmin who doesn't own his infrastructure, mixed with a developer who doesn't own his code.

silisili 4y ago
"So, what would you say you do here?"

rwky 4y ago

I've been hired for multiple DevOps roles. For me it means Syadmin (happy Syadmin day btw) but also responsible for managing the plethora of AWS etc service, CI/CD pipelines, dealing with security audits, the occasional diving into code for back end stuff and being on hand for advice/comments.

hgsgm 4y ago

AndyMcConachie 4y ago

About 20 years ago I had a job where I was called an 'Integration Engineer'. It would be called Dev Ops now. It will be called something different in 20 years. Who cares?

quickthrower2 4y ago

I thought devops was the cattle not pets mentality. Script all the things. Then CI. Then Terraform. Not necessarily that tool, but that class of solution.

AlexB138 4y ago

> When I first heard the term, it was used to tell us that us developers need to do our own operations. And we did. Cool. That is not at all what it ever meant, and is very much the opposite of the original meaning. For what it's worth, I personally think this is probably the best approach now though. > Then it turned into 'developers need to work with the operations people.' Wait what is this just a mantra or something? This is sort of it. Calling it a "mantra" is fine, but it was meant to be a cultural shift. It was actually pretty successful, which I think is why most people are a little mystified as to what it was originally about. It has become just the way things are done, so it is difficult to recognize as a change. Back before this change started to happen, developers and operations teams used to be much much more divided. They rarely spoke to each other until applications were preparing for release, and then it was the dreaded "throw it over the wall". Operators didn't want devs touching their environments and breaking things. Developers didn't want anything to do with production, because once the code was released their job was done. The whole idea was to align these incentives, and to modernize Operations (which was frankly very stuck in old mindsets). > Now it's just a fancy word for 'sysadmin', apparently? This is what people mean when they say "if you are hiring 'DevOps engineers' you're doing it wrong". Anyways, it's basically a dead phrase. If you've been in the industry less than 15 years or so, it's basically meaningless to you. The movement it came from achieved its goals so well that it no longer has any useful meaning. It now just serves as a way to nerdsnipe people who were there into explaining what it actually meant.