|
|
|
|
|
by carbon8
4595 days ago
|
|
Short-lived staging environments (eg, a temporary clone of a production environment) certainly have a place, such as when making architectural changes, but these kinds of changes are generally not happening on a regular basis if you are making incremental changes and doing continuous deployment. I'm sure that there are companies that have a valid engineering need for perpetual staging environments rather than feature flags, but I've seen absolutely no evidence that staging servers are commonly engineering driven. Certainly in every part of the web startup world I've had contact with or heard about, staging environments have consistently been for product QA in organizations with heavy-handed processes and/or product management by non-technical stakeholders. Edit for the people responding: This is not about haphazardly pushing to production. You should familiarize yourselves with continuous integration (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuous_integration) and the various deployment strategies of major web companies. |
|
In our case, having a staging server (which is really a prod server since it's used for some internal stuff) gives us a chance to check a few things:
1. The installer still installs everything properly. 2. The main website works 3. Web services work
We don't have any hard and fast rules about how long things sit on staging, but having a staging system is useful.
So there you have it, a staging environment driven by engineering.