7 things that keep teams from doing Continuous Delivery (deploying daily or even hourly):
1. Non-atomic PRs.
Solution: Each PR must be ready for a prod deploy before it can be merged to `develop`. To separate deployment from release, use a feature flag.
1/x (thread)
2. Ad-hoc release notes.
Solution: Declare release notes in CHANGELOG.md. Require an entry in this file in each PR. Validate this file has changed on each CI build. This assures the release notes are customer friendly, accurate, and complete.
2/x
3. Flakey tests.
Solution: Most tests should be unit and integration tests. Mock the API. Simplify E2E tests. E2E should merely assure each section loads. Anything more granular may lead to flakiness due to changing data.
3/x
4. Manual environment deploys.
Solution: Automatically deploy to the next environment once someone clicks approve.
4/x
5. Scheduled releases.
Solution: Stop scheduling releases. Instead, deploy continuously (daily or even hourly).
5/x
6. Manual testing.
Solution: Focus manual testing on exploratory & usability testing. These require a manual process. Shift manual testing activities "left" by doing them as part of the PR process. Otherwise, if it's worth testing, it's worth automating.
6/x
7. No rollback process.
Solution: Implement blue/green deploy so you can easily rollback a release. Blue/green deploy avoids downtime and supports instantly switching between the previous and the new deployment.
7/x
Removing these 7 blockers to CD will help your team deliver value faster. You'll gather feedback more quickly. And you'll respond to production issues faster.
Continuous delivery makes teams more agile.
</thread>
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure."
— Goodhart’s Law
Example 1: Story points measure difficulty. But, if you set a target for story points completed per week, developers inflate their story point estimates to assure they hit the target.
Example 2: Tracking code coverage helps the team understand what code is tested. But if you target a certain code coverage percentage, developers game the system by writing useless tests.
Example 3: Burn down charts help estimate the completion date. But if you set a goal of burning down to zero every sprint, developers commit to less work in each sprint. And they avoid proposing any work that’s hard to estimate. This assures they can burn down to zero.
Let’s talk about the implications of researching decisions (Thread)
If I quickly make a decision, it feels unimportant. I go with my gut. I’m typically happy.
Occasionally, I decide to research a decision. More research leads to better outcomes, right?
Not necessarily...
If I heavily research a decision, the decision feels more important. I want to justify my research time. So, I search for every tradeoff. I optimize for perfection. But, because my expectations are now so high, I’m more likely to be disappointed! 🤦♂️
So, here’s the trap: The more I research a decision, the more important the decision seems. This leads to problems:
1. Overspending due to over-valuing minor differences and fear of missing out.