3 ms·
These are the very arguments I get all the time. 1) I want to invalidate caches, I want to know that these systems work. I want to know that my software proper
by mbrumlow 2y ago
These are the very arguments I get all the time.
1) I want to invalidate caches, I want to know that these systems work. I want to know that my software properly handles this situation.
2) if I have lazy clients. I want to know. And I want to motivate them on updating sooner or figure out how to force update them. I don’t want to not update because some people are slow. I want the norm to be it is updating, so when there is a reason to update, like a zero day, I can have some notion that the updates will work and the lazy clients will not be an issue.
I am not talking about fake or dry runs that go through some portion of motions, I want every aspect of the process to be real.
Performance means nothing if your stuff is down. And any perceived performance gained by not doing proper hygiene is just tweaking the numbers to look better than they really are.
- skybrian 2y agoI think it often makes sense to do full releases frequently, but not continuously. For example, Chrome is on an approximately four week schedule, which makes sense for them. Other projects have faster cadences. There is a point of diminishing returns, though, and you seem to be ignoring the downsides.
- mbrumlow 2y agoI think once a week is good. Maybe once every two weeks.