> Most companies cant afford to throw large amounts of money at a team who’s entire job is managing a Jenkins pipeline. I don't agree with this at the 300 engi

> Most companies cant afford to throw large amounts of money at a team who’s entire job is managing a Jenkins pipeline. I don't agree with this at the 300 engineer level; Specifically that they can't afford it. At that point, one or two more engineers is 1-2% increase in spend on compensation, and if you can get someone to handle architecture and developer support (ideally two different people) and empower them to make useful changes, you can probably get the ball rolling. Now, if you're talking about a 20-50 engineer shop, the math can be a fair bit different and there I do agree with you. It seems more down to the evergreen issue of tech debt and fragile tech stacks being a hard-to-quantify cost and mostly hidden from those making the budget decisions. No budget for maintenance or architecture -- things are done in the cheapest most expedient way possible. Then it becomes harder to make future changes, so doing it the right way starts costing even more, and the cycle repeats. > Welcome, Neo, to the real world. Indeed. Gamedev was frustrating for this quite often.