|
Radical! Some counter-points, though. - Infrastructure as code and schemas as code make it easier to keep environmental parity, because everything can be rolled back/forwards/reset with easy source control and CD operations. Visual environment diffing and drift detection can make this even easier. - Make your stage and prod into a blue-green situation, where if stage is ready to go, you flip users onto it. I can guarantee your stage and prod will both be respected as prod then. Failing that, just add load/stress tests to stage to make it more prod-like. - Non-prod environments and attention are not necessarily debt, but they are expensive insurance premiums. You should only pay those premiums if you need the insurance. It's about risk management. - As time passes, the people who wrote a specific part of a system don't know it anymore, so having them babysit 'their' code in production has diminishing returns. On the other hand, having a systems quality team who have a broad mandate to bugfix, put in preventative measure, reduce technical debt, improve observibility and establish good patterns for developers to do these things, can enabled these things to actually happen, when just telling devs who are busy making features that they should happen often doesn't make them happen. Also there are devs who enjoy creating new things, and others who love trouble-shooting and metrics. |