> change management system That's an unusual way to spell "git". But that's not the point. The point is that change management is useless unless you know why y

> change management system That's an unusual way to spell "git". But that's not the point. The point is that change management is useless unless you know why you are doing it. That's why all commit messages should contain the "why". > You will also be monitoring those changes What you should do is monitor and evaluate the findings, then on taking the decision this is actually what you want, commit it and stage it through the testing environments. Automatically tuning parameters means diagnosing problems will be even harder than today. There is also the risk of diverging test and prod unless you are being careful. You really have to know what you are doing when deploying these tools. The worst catastrophes I've seen involves automatically scaling ram/disk/pods. A problem that should have been trivial in the first place can quickly set off feedback loops.