[gonzo41]

Imagine a Graph, the x-axis is time or adoption of a set of technologies. Right now the hump in the bell curve is CI/CD and devops. It's safe to be in a large group. If something better comes along then it'll start happening and in 15 years I expect the whole of government to adopt it when you are bemoaning the pitfalls of any new approach.

[dielectrikboog]

I know what a hype curve is, and I made two substantive points to differentiate this situation from a hype curve. I’m not “bemoaning the pitfalls,” I’ll repeat that I’m concerned this approach, which is gaining traction and getting solidified and entrenched, will spook the decisionmakers on being willing to accept your 15-year solution when it comes along.

If you’re going to be as patronizing as you are, please at least read what I’ve written and respond to it.

[gonzo41]

CI/CD is a good enough framework at the moment. The goal is to build things and ship product to customers. It does that well and thats why it's winning.

The fact that a jenkinsfile starts with groovy and can include N number of different languages is just the nature of the beast. There is always fragmentation in software integration, and devops is integration on steroids.

Any other methods, formal or otherwise, need to provide X value at a cost of Y that makes adoption worth it. Currently if you don't use CI/CD then the value and cost propositions of adopting CI/CD actually start to make a lot of sense if you are mature enough to accurately do cost accounting on your IT management processes.

Yes, it's true, Jenkinsfiles, Cloudformation Json and Yaml all suck to work with. And configuration management is tricky. But I know that we'll all think the same thing about any other system or approach we adopt because it'll end up being work.

CI/CD may be a trade off but it allows us to focus on business problems rather than technical ones.