[redis_mlc]

- DevOps originally was supposed to eliminate Operations (Sysadmin) staff by involving Dev with the Infra and Release process.

- But Dev is incentivized to create features, not know the intricacies of Release at scale, so dedicated Devops (Operations) teams were again staffed

- dedicated DevOps teams are here to stay except in certain unique scenarios. For example, I've seen some Indian-led SV startups that hate Operations staff ("oh, they're overhead") carefully design their production environment around using services that don't need mgmt. (DynamoDB, Lambda, etc.), and that will work up to a certain scale.

However, every time they have a problem with AWS, onboarding, security, excessive on-call rotations, etc. their developers have to be ready to become the DevOps they so despise, reducing the number of featueres they can build.

- in larger companies, Devs don't have access to production, so again dedicated DevOps teams are needed if only to enforce policy.

[imperialdrive]

This aligns with some of my experience. Btw, your comment appeared 'dead' to me which didn't make sense... I learned about the ability to 'vouch' for the first time. Great feature. HN truly is a well evolved platform. Kudos to all roles for providing this service, visited and valued by so many wonderful geeks. Ty!

[sys_64738]

> in larger companies, Devs don't have access to production, so again dedicated DevOps teams are needed if only to enforce policy

Nor should developers be let near productions as they'll always try to root cause problems in production. Developers are their own worst enemies which is why DevOps is a misnomer.

[detaro]

> DevOps originally was supposed to eliminate Operations (Sysadmin) staff

It wasn't. It was supposed to break down the model of Dev and Ops being separate silos that don't work together well and don't understand/respect each others concerns.

[dkdk8283]

I think devops will always be needed in some incarnation for companies that are subject to SOX and SoD.