5 ms·
CI has been such a productivity killer. You don’t need it. Stick with CD only and you can ship.
by berkle4455 4y ago
CI has been such a productivity killer. You don’t need it. Stick with CD only and you can ship.
- alrocar 4y agoI'm really interested in different points of view. I guess you mean the kind of trunk based development? But still some sort of CI happens, maybe locally. Never worked in a different way than using a local / remote CI pipeline, that's why I'm curious.
- jdkoeck 4y agoCI is a prerequisite for CD.
- berkle4455 4y agoIt’s literally not.
- nerdponx 4y agoIt might be required in that it's impossible to deliver continuously if changes are not integrated continuously, for some definition of "integrated".
- teach 4y agoI'm tempted to just downvote you and move on with my life but I'm genuinely curious. Given that it's meaningless to Deploy something without Integrating the changes, what do you _actually_ mean by "You don’t need [CI]. Stick with CD only." Are you just talking about testing the changes? Help us out here.
- xboxnolifes 4y agoI guess you could just have an unchanging project redeploy itself every hour or so.
- twic 4y agoWhat if people push unmerged feature branches, and then the automation just deploys the most recent one? I'm not advocating this, just to be clear.
- nerdponx 4y agoI've done smaller projects before where "CI" only consists of merging to trunk/main/master, while testing, linting, etc. is covered by code review and the honor system. I wouldn't advocate this for something business critical that a lot of developers collaborate on, but you can do CD with only trivial CI.
- mailund 4y agoInteresting, how do you define CI in that case? IIRC, CI was originally defined as integrating continuously (i.e. daily or more frequently) and CD is delivering said code continuously. How does CI hurt productivity and how do you do CD without CI?