3 ms·
There’s another maturity level: blah blah blah, but our CICD setup and overall code quality has long proven itself to be of such quality that we as a team / org
by cqqxo4zV46cp 3y ago
There’s another maturity level: blah blah blah, but our CICD setup and overall code quality has long proven itself to be of such quality that we as a team / organisation have opted to assume this risk.
My real point is that, at a point, reasonable people can disagree about this, and calling these “maturity levels” strays further from reality and closer to the usual pass-ag nerd habit of mistaking personal preference for absolute objective truth.
- koolcode 3y ago> the usual pass-ag nerd habit of mistaking personal preference for absolute objective truth. Gospel
- SideburnsOfDoom 3y agoI've seen all three in use, and while agree that "maturity level" is not "absolute objective truth" - that's your overstated reading, but IMHO dismissing them as mere "personal preference" is also wrong in the other direction. These are not personal - they are are the product of the interactions and agreements of a large number of co-operating people who look for ways to deal with release quality concerns with instruments that they are familiar with: signoffs, manual gates, controls; vs. automation and small batches. Also dismissing them as "mere preference" implies that the outcomes will be broadly similar, in my experience this is not at all so. The industry has uncovered ways to proceed both fast and safely, but these are not widespread, partly because of the myopia that they are mere "preferences".