|
James_Parsons wrote: 10 - 15 people
10 minus 15 people, what does a team with -5 people look like, your Christmas parties must be a bit quiet? 
|
|
|
|
|
lol, I ment ten to fifteen.
wow m8 gr8 b8 I r8 an 8/8. though it was a little l8 and it seems you h8 f8, it still has that tr8 that makes you acceler8.
|
|
|
|
|
I still haven't figured out what DevOps is. Whenever I read the definition, it just sounds like a newfangled way of describing "communicate between departments effectively."
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
It's a term used to market "added value"(euhg! there's a bit of puke in my mouth after typing that  ) to managers who don't understand how experienced and skilled IT people work.
It's basically what most of us, who have managed to hold down a job in IT for more than 1 year, do.
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: still haven't figured out what DevOps is.
Software services, basically. DevOps just sounds cooler?
|
|
|
|
|
I don't know, but it makes me feel like a secret agent 
Rossel. Sander Rossel. DevOp 007 
|
|
|
|
|
Marc...
I have been looking at articles concerning DevOps and what it appears to be is a process by which developers accrue more responsibilities of what we used to call in the mainframe era, "production control". This means that instead of having a separate that handles the different processes of moving software into production, developers will take on a number of these responsibilities.
Some articles describe it, as you said, as a process of better communication. However, this is splitting hairs. How much more communication does a team require with its implementation team? It could be in many cases DevOps proposes to eliminate standardized procedures used for tracking the implementation processes (ie: request to implement forms). However, this does not make any sense as without such procedures you would have no way of tracking what was done when; unless of course these are the very procedures that DevOps would expect a development team to acquire.
Any way you slice it, this paradigm makes very little sense and is attempting to use the changing nature of software development to break down further the various vital divisions that have existed for many years in well organized organizations.
This is what happened in the 1990s with the dropping of such formal levels as business and system analysts, database review teams, and the like. The result is what you have today in many places; a complete useless mess...
Steve Naidamast
Sr. Software Engineer
Black Falcon Software, Inc.
blackfalconsoftware@outlook.com
|
|
|
|
|
Steve Naidamast wrote: he result is what you have today in many places; a complete useless mess...
That's what I'm noticing too. It's odd, and perhaps because I've worked primarily with small companies (though there was that horrid Citi stint a few years ago), but I and "the team" (where applicable) have always been involved in the entire lifecycle of product, usually from inception to production to maintenance, including smoothing out QA and in the field issue tracking.
What it all boils down to, ironically, is standardized procedures. And because, as I experience over and over, the people responsible for moving software into production do not themselves have procedures, nor the discipline to create them, I end up writing the ATP's and installation docs, if only to keep my life more sane. It's nice to be able to say "RTFM!" Good thing is, the people actually having to do the installation, etc., almost always appreciate the procedure-izing of their process.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Marc...
I have worked in companies of all sizes. I spent 20 years in Financial IT alone.
In the larger companies, or at least during my career, there were always standards and various groups to implement and process them. The idea of a "DevOps" paradigm taking over in such companies would be just about impossible as there are strict legalities involved in what different groups in IT can do and not do. For example if developers were processing into production their own software upgrades, the company could be severely fined as a result of external audits.
As companies get smaller they get more lax in following such standards; one, from the legal standpoint there isn't as much oversight and technically, technical managers see such standardization as a waste of time and resources. The really small companies pay no attention to anything and are usually severe organizational and technical messes.
In my close to 43 years in the industry I have seen many "fads" come and go and "DevOps" will be just another for what is already being mostly done in the smaller companies.
Since 2010 I have noticed in our profession a severe propensity for spending inordinate amounts of time "reinventing the wheel", which is where a lot of these paradigms have come from.
Steve Naidamast
Sr. Software Engineer
Black Falcon Software, Inc.
blackfalconsoftware@outlook.com
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, it is important. Organization, order, and the correct way of doing things, know nothing about team size. My opinion.
Edit: However, I have always known it to be Software Services, and most companies, that I know of at least, have something like this.
modified 26-Oct-15 12:24pm.
|
|
|
|
|
If someone or some company(cough cough Rackspace) is trying to sell you something then beware.
If you have good source control, good bug reporting and release management systems then you are already using DevOps as far as I am concerned.
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
|
|
|
|
|
I have an instinctive feral distrust of FaceBook, Google+, Twitter, LinkedIn, and all other so-called "social networking" sites. Using iTunes never crossed my mind.
Google/Chrome I have tamed (I hope) by using UBlock and Privacy Badger. In addition to strong AV software and fire-wall (EmsiSoft), I also use the MVPS hosts file that I imagine you know about.
But, today, I found the New Yorker magazine has a repository of podcasts by/about/with famous modern writers, and I am eager to listen to many of them: [^].
The catch is you have to have an account on, and log-on to iTunes, to listen, or download them which activates my trojan-horse paranoia.
If you have any tips/tricks on preventing any obnoxious behavior by iTunes, like scanning e-mail address book, etc., I'd appreciate a reply. Or, if you are certain intrusive behavior will occur if you install, and use, iTunes: thanks for your opinion/information on that.
cheers, Bill
«I want to stay as close to the edge as I can without going over. Out on the edge you see all kinds of things you can't see from the center» Kurt Vonnegut.
|
|
|
|
|
Are these podcasts exclusive to iTunes? If not, there's gotta be an RSS feed somewhere.
|
|
|
|
|
I buy quite a bit of music from iTunes, and have not noticed anything untoward (yet).
|
|
|
|
|
They took a pounding when their auto-update software checked the box to install additional software previously not installed (Safari). As of lately, they don't auto-check the additional add-on software checkboxes, but still make them visible and available. No thanks, I don't need your iCloud Drive software.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks so much, Florian ! No need to de-fang a snake now  cheers, Bill
«I want to stay as close to the edge as I can without going over. Out on the edge you see all kinds of things you can't see from the center» Kurt Vonnegut.
|
|
|
|
|
You're welcome, the link was actually on the iTunes page you posted here 
|
|
|
|
|
I don't like iTunes either. I think it's bloatware (It installs stuff like a service for recognizing if you connected an iPhone (I don't have one), quicktime, airplay etc.). Last time I wanted to download a podcast from iTunes I set up a VM for it, saved it to the disk and copied it elsewhere.
If you don't find any other source for the podcast you want to download, this might be an option in the future?
|
|
|
|
|
|
This never happens[^]
Rules for the FOSW ![ ^]
if(this.signature != "")
{
MessageBox.Show("This is my signature: " + Environment.NewLine + signature);
}
else
{
MessageBox.Show("404-Signature not found");
}
|
|
|
|
|
Er, I did, many years ago. 
|
|
|
|
|
So it was you 
Rules for the FOSW ![ ^]
if(this.signature != "")
{
MessageBox.Show("This is my signature: " + Environment.NewLine + signature);
}
else
{
MessageBox.Show("404-Signature not found");
}
|
|
|
|
|
Being someone who develops software as a hobby and asks for donations I am aware of how blinking difficult it is to get people to part with their money even when they think that your software is the bestest thing ever created.
Receiving a modest donation makes such a difference that I try and make a point of making a donation whenever I make regular use of a piece of software - as I imagine like me, other developers appreciate the small donations.
Trying not to blow my own trumpet here but more to let others know how pleasant it is to get some acknowledgement of all the hard work one has put in for a free piece of software.
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
|
|
|
|
|
Same with me (except I do not ask for donations) - I do pick free software for my needs, but make a point to donate...
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
