The Death of Sysadmin
-
@stacksofplates said in The Death of Sysadmin:
Ant and Junit were released only 4 years after Javas initial release. This stuff has been around for a long time. XP was the end of the 90s. Just because some small companies haven't heard of it doesn't represent most of Java development or development overall.
Remember, when I say "majority" I'm talking the Fortune 500 which is where most developers are. That's a market that while generally good, has a hard time with adopting new tech and techniques. Those that have thousands or tens of thousands of devs on staff... changing that environment is hard and rarely done. The same things that make them use COBOL, Fortran, and Java in tons of their apps is what also makes them not adopt new procedures.
-
Small shops, like the west coast, are the most likely to use the new techniques. That's where the culture and education behind it comes from, that's where you can hire people who already have those skills, and often those approaches are considered to be part of that culture and not necessarily widely applicable in other areas.
-
@scottalanmiller said in The Death of Sysadmin:
@Obsolesce said in The Death of Sysadmin:
@scottalanmiller said in The Death of Sysadmin:
@Obsolesce said in The Death of Sysadmin:
@scottalanmiller said in The Death of Sysadmin:
CI/CD is also one of those things that is just "one approach" in both IT and Dev circles. XP made it popular, it existed before but no one talked about it, and XP was only popular in "what people have heard of", not what people actively do. The majority of developers don't use it today. And many, maybe a majority or maybe not, don't think that it is appropriate even today. Regular integration is important, but many people believe that frequest, rather than continuous, is a better approach.
It's much like test first. It is a recent concept, not an old one. And while essentially all developers and DevOps know what it is, extremely few adopt it. It's today where CI was eight years ago.
Are you referring to the Agile approach of working? That's not the same thing as DevOps.
Um, duh. Agile is one approach to dev, one that promotes CI. I think you just stated by point, you are assuming one aspect of Agile dev and assuming that all DevOps comes from one bit of Agile dev, which isn't true at all.
I think you are wrong here.
How does repeating what I said make me wrong? I keep saying that they are not the same. Not sure what you think you are arguing against. Nothing I've said in any way conflates the two.
No, you are saying certain things are one approach to DevOps. That's what I don't agree with. In your example, XP is not an approach to DevOps because DevOps is one thing, and XP is another. You can have DevOps or XP totally without the other.
You now normally would use Agile with DevOps as a team because it just makes sense. You can't compete without doing so, or you'll be left in the dust by other competing software companies that are.
-
We still develop in VB6 and we use CI. I know large organizations resist change, but CI seems like a necessity.
-
@Obsolesce said in The Death of Sysadmin:
No, you are saying certain things are one approach to DevOps. That's what I don't agree with. In your example, XP is not an approach to DevOps because DevOps is one thing, and XP is another. You can have DevOps or XP totally without the other.
I never said or implied that XP is an approach to DevOps. NOthing you are saying is related to what I wrote.
XP is a development approach that almost no one ever used and certainly have never heard of it in relationship to DevOps. How you think anyone here has associated the two, I have no idea. Not only did I say nothing of the sort, but neither did anyone else.
-
@flaxking said in The Death of Sysadmin:
We still develop in VB6 and we use CI. I know large organizations resist change, but CI seems like a necessity.
It's not a bad idea, but coming from decades in software development before it even existed (well, one before it existed and a couple before it was popular) it is anything but necessary. I'm not against it, not at all. But necessary it is not.
-
@Obsolesce said in The Death of Sysadmin:
You now normally would use Agile with DevOps as a team because it just makes sense. You can't compete without doing so, or you'll be left in the dust by other competing software companies that are.
Sure, just as almost all modern development uses Agile. But Agile != XP. CI != Agile. DevOps != Agile. etc. All different concepts. And sometimes even Agile isn't the right choice.
-
@scottalanmiller said in The Death of Sysadmin:
But Agile != XP.
Right, XP is a type of Agile development... Where as they are not a type of DevOps.
-
@Obsolesce said in The Death of Sysadmin:
@scottalanmiller said in The Death of Sysadmin:
But Agile != XP.
Right, XP is a type of Agile development... Where as they are not a type of DevOps.
Obviously. Why do you keep restating things like this as if someone said something different?
-
@Obsolesce instead of stating really obvious facts that everyone knew and agreed upon before the start of the discussion, don't use these meaningless facts to imply something. State the thing you are trying to stay. You are beating around the bush talking about things that have nothing to really do with the discussion as if you have a point that you are trying to make, but since you are just stating obvious, universally accepted facts, there isn't anything to derive an implication from to know what you are intending to imply.
-
@scottalanmiller said in The Death of Sysadmin:
@Obsolesce said in The Death of Sysadmin:
@scottalanmiller said in The Death of Sysadmin:
But Agile != XP.
Right, XP is a type of Agile development... Where as they are not a type of DevOps.
Obviously. Why do you keep restating things like this as if someone said something different?
Because, the way you are saying things makes it seem, to me, that you think the opposite or something different.
Maybe I'm misinterpreting all of your replies, but my gist of them is that you and I don't agree with what DevOps is, or maybe you are learning and agreeing in real-time. I don't know. Maybe you are saying the things I am but in a less specific way and I'm not catching it. Again, I don't know.
But what I do know, is I'm not knowingly restating things you think you said or implied.
-
@Obsolesce said in The Death of Sysadmin:
Because, the way you are saying things makes it seem, to me, that you think the opposite or something different.
The way that I say what? I've not said anything of the sort. Do you have an example?
-
@Obsolesce said in The Death of Sysadmin:
Maybe I'm misinterpreting all of your replies, but my gist of them is that you and I don't agree with what DevOps is, or maybe you are learning and agreeing in real-time. I don't know. Maybe you are saying the things I am but in a less specific way and I'm not catching it. Again, I don't know.
This makes no sense since never once did you ever say anything that didn't agree with what I had already said. You just keep agreeing with me in a weird, aggressive tone. That's not the same as disagreeing, it's just confusing.
-
@Obsolesce said in The Death of Sysadmin:
But what I do know, is I'm not knowingly restating things you think you said or implied.
Okay, but all of your statements are just restating things that no one has disagreed with with a tone of disagreement. You feel like you are arguing, but with no one.
-
@scottalanmiller said in The Death of Sysadmin:
You feel like you are arguing
So now you're telling me how I feel?
Edit:
-
@Obsolesce said in The Death of Sysadmin:
@scottalanmiller said in The Death of Sysadmin:
You feel like you are arguing
So now you're telling me how I feel?
Edit:
lol
-
The only reason that XP was brought up was to show when CI became well known as it was XP that championed it in the early days. Along with nutty ideas like pair programming, which was a train wreck.
-
Other Agile methodologies, at least in their earlier incarnations, didn't pay much attention to CI. CI is great, but people were trying to figure out what it was and how to do it in 1999. Shops talking about (not doing, just talking about) CI were in the top .1% back then. It was an era of huge software engineering progress and change. Loads of ideas came up and some became major, like CI, and some died off and are forgotten, like PP.
