3 ms·
Every single "devops" post on HN ends up the same. About half of the comments are people saying their there exact definition of "devops" is the one true one (
by slyall 3y ago
Every single "devops" post on HN ends up the same.
About half of the comments are people saying their there exact definition of "devops" is the one true one ( Handed down from Heaven by Patrick) and if people followed that then it would be unicorns and moonbeams
Another third of comments are Developers who dislike Ops and especially that Ops can't code [well] and would seek to eliminate it. They hate that Ops people keep re-appearing with a different name each time. They will lament that Sysadmins always used to be able to code "back in the day"
Some of the remainder will be people (like the author of this article) noting that Operations is a distinct skills and that most devs don't want to do it. SO rather than trying to eliminate it perhaps we could actually do it properly.
- mehagar 3y agoRather than developers not wanting to do ops, I took the article to mean that - ops is sufficiently complex - The incentive to deliver features means that ops corners tend to be cut So the suggestion is to build a self service platform that encapsulates the complexity, while making it easier for developers to use.
- newtwilly 3y agoDoesn't help that the post didn't define their definition of devops, and then they went on to use it in a variety of contexts, seemingly contradictory. As someone who is a software engineer, but doesn't necessarily keep up on the latest hype, this post made me head spin when I tried to read it casually.