| > People will realize that giving developers the keys to the kingdom and total freedom over their application is a terrible idea. (And smart developers don't want total freedom.) Sadly, I don't think it's actually developers that were pushing for this "freedom" (with which comes responsibility, hence it makes sense that it would be unwanted), as such. Rather, I place the blame with managers and with (fellow) sysadmins for not embracing, empowering, or forcing (whatever it takes) the aspects of the original DevOps cultural movement to have Ops bring the equivalent [1] of a production environment to every developer. > Containers provide isolation and immutable infrastructure I thought they weren't even (necessarily) immutable. If not, then maybe they're merely immutable-through-practice, but that's as unsatisfying as configuration management systems creating reproducible deployments that lack traceability [2]. [1] In terms of tooling for things like builds, deployment, and management (especially of dependencies), not necessarily full hardware capacity, although at one place I did provide each developer with a copy of yesterday's production database on their own, personal bare-metal database server, less "beefy" than the production hardware. [2] is that the right word? something like chain-of-custody for code and/or configuration. |