Talk:DevOps

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Computing / Software (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Software (marked as High-importance).
 
WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors
WikiProject iconA version of this article was copy edited by Scalhotrod, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on 26 April 2015. The Guild welcomes all editors with a good grasp of English and Wikipedia's policies and guidelines to help in the drive to improve articles. Visit our project page if you're interested in joining! If you have questions, please direct them to our talk page.
 

Criticism?[edit]

I'm surprised this article does not have a "Criticism" section, common to most other technology-related articles. I've heard anecdotal arguments that DevOps dilutes the specific skills of many engineers and teams, for example, and its implementation without defining responsibilities can cause organizational friction and lower productivity. Example - https://dzone.com/articles/devops-isnt-killing-developers — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.168.112.98 (talk) 19:48, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Are you serious? There is no critism to be heard. This is why the article has protected status. No cult here. Move along. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.181.208.102 (talk) 11:47, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

Agile represents a change in thinking, whereas DevOps actually implements organizational cultural change.[15][edit]

This does not make sense and needs to be reviewed with a close reading of the source. A change in thinking is cultural change.

The article is in IT management speak, and needs to define terms to meet the needs of the general wikipedia audience.


External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on DevOps. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

☑Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.


Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:55, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

DevOps or Devops ?[edit]

I came here to Wikipedia to look for a definitive answer. I first reviewed Portmanteau and List_of_portmanteaus and I did not see a single example of a portmanteau that has this sort of camelcase format. I thought I was validated in my understanding that the proper spelling is "devops". The list of List_of_portmanteaus it is listed under section Internet and computing as "devops"

I click the link and I'm brought to here where the page is named "DevOps". What the heck ?

Gbonk (talk) 00:41, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

DevOps is near universal across the literature. WP will of course apply its dogmmatic naming rules and change this to "Devops" before long, despite any external sourcing. See PaaS, SaaS et al. Andy Dingley (talk) 01:14, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Andy Dingley If I understand WP title conventions, camelcase is frowned upon, but less so for separating words as in this case. My understanding is not clear about the competing follow the sources/commonname vs don't rely on domain experts for spelling. I'd just keep it as is. Those acronyms also seem fine to me as camel, and I agree about the articles being lowercase, which is how they've evolved. E.g. I just moved Infrastructure as Code to Infrastructure as code, but the acro IaS seems fine. This seems inconsistent, but livable? Widefox; talk 15:07, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
Capitalise, see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Computing#Capitalisation in DevOps terms?. "Infrastructure as code" is a pure wikineologism and it is not WP's role to invent such. Andy Dingley (talk) 15:14, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

A useless statistic?[edit]

"However, a study released in January 2017 by F5 of almost 2,200 IT executives and industry professionals found that only one in five surveyed think DevOps had a strategic impact on their organization despite rise in usage."

Does this mean anything at all? Maybe the four in five who found it had no significant impact were the ones who had done almost nothing with these ideas. We in fact know of the giant acceleration in release rates being achieved by places like Amazon and Netflix using these principles. Is it really significant that the CIO of Stodgy Old Dinosaur Corporation sees no benefit in the ideas? GeneCallahan (talk) 02:39, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

DevOps as a job title[edit]

Even as a software developer, I don't understand what the section wants to explain about DevOps as a job title. It is clearly a topic worth mentioning but I don't see how the article answers the question what such job title represents. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:CB05:4AE:F500:1091:75DE:9C49:FBF6 (talk) 07:23, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

I completely agree. I'm looking for jobs in the software development field and see the title 'DevOps' all the time, and after reading this page i am still completely clueless as to what it means. Grimdark (talk) 16:03, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Why is this have a NPV flag?[edit]

"This article contains content that is written like an advertisement. Please help improve it by removing promotional content and inappropriate external links, and by adding encyclopedic content written from a neutral point of view. (May 2018) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)"

Came to talk section to find an explanation for the tag, but can't find one. Reading the article as it is at the moment, I would not consider this to be written like an advertisement. It might need better sourcing or some criticisms, but not sure what or where. Can anyone explain? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.154.213.183 (talk) 03:03, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Looking it over, it seems that some of the content might be unnecessary and serve primarily to promote DevOps, but as a non-expert, it's hard for me to say for sure. I'd ask someone at WikiProject Software what they think. Compassionate727 (T·C) 14:09, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
Agreed. In absence of any reasoned defense for adding advert tag to article (after several months now), I am removing it.  Done
The sections "Views on the benefits claimed for DevOps" and "Cultural change" could use more development. Like almost all other software engineering and software development methodology articles (see links in article's Info sidebar), this article could use more such summaries of the challenges and criticisms published in reliable sources - not self-published blog entries. Finding good sources for such is not difficult: a "criticisms of x" search works. The challenge is finding just a few of the very best that cover the key issues - e.g., Dev vs. Ops culture conflicts, workflow habits, complexity, costs of retooling and training, integrating COTS info VC - objectively and factually. Filter out self-published blogs with no external editorial oversight, as those unvetted opinion pieces are a dime a dozen and violate Wikipedia content guidelines. Still a lot out there for anyone to improve this article. Also, many of the now standard DevOps books address some of these issues head on. -- Paulscrawl (talk) 18:43, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

Bad prose[edit]

"They are well communicated and collaborated internally"

That sentence does not make sense. GeneCallahan (talk) 06:00, 30 August 2018 (UTC)