Reply to post: Re: The problem with DevOps . . .

DevOps still 'rarely done well at scale' concludes report after a decade of research

Geez Money

Re: The problem with DevOps . . .

I mostly agree with your points here. Two things I'd add:

1) devops doesn't mean no dedicated operations folks, it just means that if you need operational experts they tightly consult with or embed in your dev teams. If done right devops can be mutually beneficial and both sides can learn a bunch of new skills along the way, including getting rid of one of the things that annoys ops folks the most in my experience, which is that devs throw things over the wall and wash their hands.

2) a lot of the key reasons for devops also boil down to your other point about ops folks not being great at writing their own software (most ops folks I've met can program and will knock simple apps out of the park, but few and far between can really handle deving complex software) which means that when you want to start end to end automating everything the ops people also start needing dev resources.

Done well devops is more about recognizing that the software lifecycle is disjointed and merging the two disjointed segments. As I noted in an earlier comment, most of the time "devops" means that a company took their existing operations engineers and renamed them to devops engineers and kept the 'throw the software over the wall' mentality intact, which is a huge problem.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon