Slashdot Mirror
Most Organizations Are Not Fully Embracing DevOps (betanews.com)
An anonymous reader shares a report: Although many businesses have begun moving to DevOps-style processes, eight out of 10 respondents to a new survey say they still have separate teams for managing infrastructure/operations and development. The study by managed cloud specialist 2nd Watch of more than 1,000 IT professionals indicates that a majority of companies have yet to fully commit to the DevOps process. 78 percent of respondents say that separate teams are still managing infrastructure/operations and application development. Some organizations surveyed are using infrastructure-as-code tools, automation or even CI/CD pipelines, but those techniques alone do not define DevOps.
and this story is correct in that we haven't completely embraced DevOps. Our dev and DevOps teams use Agile so there's a ridiculous two week minimum delay for any fix since you have to add the JIRA issue to a new sprint before you can fix it. Agile doesn't work well with things that must be fixed for customers. Even worse is since most of our developers are on four scrum teams, they have four stand-ups per day where they need to talk about what they've accomplished and what they commit to doing before the next stand-up. Actually getting work done has suffered since you need to do something superficial each day for four times each day.
One of the problems with DevOps is that the term has completely become an overloaded marketing Buzzword that has little to do with the original intent. I wrote a long article about DevOps last year explaining that it does not mean a new team or role, but rather a culture between the Dev and Ops groups to work more closely together. The 'toss over the fence' model that is traditional with Waterfall is not working well when doing 'Agile'. Agile itself is often a pure excuse to justify 'anything goes without planning'.
> Automagically usually means no peer review
We used the setting in GitHub to automatically require peer review before a change can be merged. That's the only reason we now have peer review consistently. It was spotty until we made it an automatic requirement.