4 ms·
> For as much as companies have focused on DevOps and continuous delivery, the sad truth is that the trend of releasing software has remained relatively flat, w
by vosper 3y ago
> For as much as companies have focused on DevOps and continuous delivery, the sad truth is that the trend of releasing software has remained relatively flat, with only 10% of teams releasing at least daily.
Sad truth? Only? How about an alternative interpretation: 90% of teams don’t need or want to release at least daily. And so they don’t.
Continuous delivery is something that 90% of software teams don’t need and shouldn’t waste time on. It’s been overhyped.
- ckdot2 3y agoEven if you don't need or want to deploy daily, your software should be continous deliverable.
- ojkelly 3y agoReleasing code to prod is the end of the feedback loop, until then you have possibly working software. The long you wait until release, the less likely it will work as you expect. You don’t need to release to users, that can happen later. Every team I’ve been on that could release daily never wanted to go back to anything less. The tooling is still too hard for mass adoption by teams, but the benefits are real.
- throw__away7391 3y agoYou’re both conflating two issues. A solid fully automated CI/CD is table stakes for any professional project. Releasing on some particular cadence has little to do with this aside from the fact that it isn’t possible without such automation. In many contexts I’d consider security and audit ability far more important than release pace, and even on personal projects you want the deployment to be reproducible and explicitly defined.
- benwad 3y agoI disagree about continuous delivery. Small, regular releases mean less risk in each release. Basically every company I've worked for has used CI/CD, although 'release daily' seems arbitrary (you release when you merge - that's the whole idea. If there's nothing merged today, we have nothing to release).