GitOps workflows can have safety gates that require a manual double-check/approval step, for instance if the deployment plan is substantially different or if de

GitOps workflows can have safety gates that require a manual double-check/approval step, for instance if the deployment plan is substantially different or if deletes and loss of data would occur. They weren't implemented in this case, but that doesn't mean they can't be implemented. They probably should be implemented as a takeaway from this article. Source control is great at auditing why a change occurred. (Keep in mind some of those changes include things like bad merge accidents and sloppy refactors. Source control never guarantees a perfect state of the code at any point in time, only a saved state.) Source control can also give you an estimate in how big of a change occurred (diff size, number of files changed/moved/deleted). You can use those same tools in the process of a GitOps workflow and in setting smart manual gates, not just in post-mortem root cause finding when things go wrong.