Comments on: Capability For Continuous Deployment http://www.laurathomson.com/2011/08/capability-for-continuous-deployment/ Laura Thomson's random thoughts and rants about tech and FOSS Thu, 17 May 2012 23:18:32 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5 By: David Tobey http://www.laurathomson.com/2011/08/capability-for-continuous-deployment/#comment-1612 David Tobey Wed, 10 Aug 2011 14:00:54 +0000 http://www.laurathomson.com/?p=135#comment-1612 Thank you for the thought-provoking post. There can be some nasty psychological barriers to continuous deployment, or deployment period for that matter. Deployment can be where the rubber meets the road. Where the developer's "Platonic ideal" you mentioned in another post may well get burst. So in addition to the mechanics, the human environment needs to be there as well, where developers are maybe encouraged not to treat their work quite so much as precious jewels but rather tools to help real people in practical situations. And where the users or other stakeholders have some flexibility and forgiveness about new code as they begin to use it. Thank you for the thought-provoking post. There can be some nasty psychological barriers to continuous deployment, or deployment period for that matter. Deployment can be where the rubber meets the road. Where the developer’s “Platonic ideal” you mentioned in another post may well get burst. So in addition to the mechanics, the human environment needs to be there as well, where developers are maybe encouraged not to treat their work quite so much as precious jewels but rather tools to help real people in practical situations. And where the users or other stakeholders have some flexibility and forgiveness about new code as they begin to use it.

]]> By: laura http://www.laurathomson.com/2011/08/capability-for-continuous-deployment/#comment-1604 laura Sat, 06 Aug 2011 01:58:32 +0000 http://www.laurathomson.com/?p=135#comment-1604 Axel, I think my main beef here is that when people have no idea what coverage they have - say it's 5% - but they have some tests. This makes them wildly overconfident about deployment. Also, 100% code coverage with unit tests doesn't give you load, smoke, acceptance, system, or browser testing. The main thing, I think, is to know the limitations of your tests. Erik - thanks! The quantum of deployment is the inverse of deployment velocity, as I read it. I liked your post when I first read it, and probably even more so now. Axel, I think my main beef here is that when people have no idea what coverage they have - say it’s 5% - but they have some tests. This makes them wildly overconfident about deployment. Also, 100% code coverage with unit tests doesn’t give you load, smoke, acceptance, system, or browser testing. The main thing, I think, is to know the limitations of your tests.

Erik - thanks! The quantum of deployment is the inverse of deployment velocity, as I read it. I liked your post when I first read it, and probably even more so now.

]]> By: Erik Kastner http://www.laurathomson.com/2011/08/capability-for-continuous-deployment/#comment-1603 Erik Kastner Fri, 05 Aug 2011 23:44:24 +0000 http://www.laurathomson.com/?p=135#comment-1603 Great post! This is very much the point I was trying to make (in a very long-winded way) with my post on code as craft: http://codeascraft.etsy.com/2010/05/20/quantum-of-deployment/ from the post: This isn’t a post about continuous deployment. Having a very simple deployment procedure is something you should do even if the thought of deploying your code 20 times a day scares you. Deployment can be a contentious subject with many stakeholders. Getting it simple and repeatable allows everyone to share a common vocabulary. Great post!
This is very much the point I was trying to make (in a very long-winded way) with my post on code as craft:
http://codeascraft.etsy.com/2010/05/20/quantum-of-deployment/

from the post:

This isn’t a post about continuous deployment. Having a very simple deployment procedure is something you should do even if the thought of deploying your code 20 times a day scares you. Deployment can be a contentious subject with many stakeholders. Getting it simple and repeatable allows everyone to share a common vocabulary.

]]> By: Axel Hecht http://www.laurathomson.com/2011/08/capability-for-continuous-deployment/#comment-1602 Axel Hecht Fri, 05 Aug 2011 22:25:13 +0000 http://www.laurathomson.com/?p=135#comment-1602 I become less of a believer in coverage. No coverage is a great indicator of lack of tests, but good coverage sadly says very little about how much your tests reflect what's supposed to happen. Not that I have a good suggestion to replace coverage with. I become less of a believer in coverage. No coverage is a great indicator of lack of tests, but good coverage sadly says very little about how much your tests reflect what’s supposed to happen.

Not that I have a good suggestion to replace coverage with.

]]>