4 ms·

Does a change being accepted into master equal it becoming live in production at your company? That seems even more ludicrous.

SideburnsOfDoom 3y ago
> Does a change being accepted into master equal it becoming live in production at your company? Where I am, and at other good companies that I know of, "a change being accepted into main" equals processes being automatically started, that progress it through further environments and test suites, that if they all go well, result in "it becoming live in production" with no further human intervention. So you oversimplified, but it's a qualified yes. Continuous deployment is a very safe and productive way of working. It encourages small batches of change and thorough automated testing. If you find it "ludicrous" that says more about you than anything else. There are books on the subject if you're interested.
- ruh-roh 3y ago
  I joined a company last year that has a handful of legacy products, and we successfully moved one of them to a CD model a few months ago. It's hilarious to sit back and watch every other team have the same monthly loop of big change -> lengthy test cycle -> "go-live" meeting -> fixes/big change -> more testing... etc. Loads of stress and finger-pointing. Hardly ever hear a peep from the CD team. Sure, it's not all rainbows and lollipops. They do have urgent production issues time-to-time, but most are resolved by a rollback (or feature toggle flipped).
  - SideburnsOfDoom 3y ago
    Congratulations. But it might be time to "make a peep" internally to other teams about "how we successfully moved to a CD model and what it gave us, and how you can do it too". Mainly for your colleague's stress levels, and secondarily for the business's success.
bdsa 3y ago
In some domains that is an explicit goal.
jacknews 3y ago
As others have said, not everything going into main goes straight to production, but it's the start of the process that should see it deployed. Nothing should go there unless it's a candidate for deployment. To me continuous deployment means deploying features as they are ready (and the smaller the better), rather than batching up big 'releases'. It does not mean deploying code line-by-line. All IMHO of course.
- twic 3y ago
  The term "continuous deployment" was absolutely coined to describe automatically deploying the trunk into production after it passes some set of tests. That's a sufficiently scary idea that that for many people the meaning has become watered down over time. Note that i'm not endorsing the practice. I find it scary too.

SideburnsOfDoom 3y ago

> Does a change being accepted into master equal it becoming live in production at your company? Where I am, and at other good companies that I know of, "a change being accepted into main" equals processes being automatically started, that progress it through further environments and test suites, that if they all go well, result in "it becoming live in production" with no further human intervention. So you oversimplified, but it's a qualified yes. Continuous deployment is a very safe and productive way of working. It encourages small batches of change and thorough automated testing. If you find it "ludicrous" that says more about you than anything else. There are books on the subject if you're interested.

ruh-roh 3y ago
I joined a company last year that has a handful of legacy products, and we successfully moved one of them to a CD model a few months ago. It's hilarious to sit back and watch every other team have the same monthly loop of big change -> lengthy test cycle -> "go-live" meeting -> fixes/big change -> more testing... etc. Loads of stress and finger-pointing. Hardly ever hear a peep from the CD team. Sure, it's not all rainbows and lollipops. They do have urgent production issues time-to-time, but most are resolved by a rollback (or feature toggle flipped).
- SideburnsOfDoom 3y ago
  Congratulations. But it might be time to "make a peep" internally to other teams about "how we successfully moved to a CD model and what it gave us, and how you can do it too". Mainly for your colleague's stress levels, and secondarily for the business's success.

bdsa 3y ago

In some domains that is an explicit goal.

jacknews 3y ago

As others have said, not everything going into main goes straight to production, but it's the start of the process that should see it deployed. Nothing should go there unless it's a candidate for deployment. To me continuous deployment means deploying features as they are ready (and the smaller the better), rather than batching up big 'releases'. It does not mean deploying code line-by-line. All IMHO of course.

twic 3y ago
The term "continuous deployment" was absolutely coined to describe automatically deploying the trunk into production after it passes some set of tests. That's a sufficiently scary idea that that for many people the meaning has become watered down over time. Note that i'm not endorsing the practice. I find it scary too.