Thanks for the article.
Thanks for the article. I apologize in advance if this is a hijack, but I've really been trying to understand the craze of CI and feel this is a good place to hopefully get answers. CI is something I have a constant struggle with. I primarily work in small teams and I tend to work with other developers that are diligent about running tests and know that "if the tests aren't green when I merge master into my topic branch, I don't push to master." When I did work on a larger team, maybe CI was useful for the other programmers that weren't as diligent. Though, the CI box eventually got quite slow and you didn't get feedback until 15 minutes later (this was Jenkins) versus 2-3 minutes locally. Unless I'm missing something, I guess when you distill CI down to what it does you get: - Runs your test suite - Lets you know if a failure happens That's not a ton of value in my eyes, which is why I assume all of these hosted CI solutions are now also doing CD upon successful builds. You could also get CD without CI by using something like git hooks that kick off deploy scripts after certain events. GitHub showing the status of your CI on the PR screen is cool, but while I do use GitHub, I mostly use GitHub as a code repository. The most I do in the web UI is clone repos and open pull requests. If you merge a branch into master that correlates to an open PR, GitHub automatically closes the PR for you. I know we're in the era of "Automate ALL the things!" and I'm good about that, but typing `rake|make|etc` into my console isn't a huge pain point in my life right now. Is CI a luxury we've been brainwashed to love by the programming hegemony? Someone please let me know what I'm missing.
Posted by rubiquity on Jul 17, 2014, 6:51 PM
Tags
Related issues
- [BUG] Cowork (Windows): all Plan9 shares fail with "Plan9 mount failed: invalid argument" after Windows update KB5124008 (26200.9445) — uninstalling the KB fixe
- Feature Request: Auto-resume CLI session when usage limit resets
- Please deobfuscate the Python
- [Bug] MLX version of Gemma 4 26B fails to load: "Model type gemma4 not supported" (macOS)
- # 233 Developers Discussed Abandoning the Office Add-in Platform — An Open Letter on the Office.js Stability, Security & Trust Crisis
- [FEATURE] Allow users to configure which shell the Bash tool uses or inherit initial shell
Raise real-world problems, find people facing the same issue, and discuss solutions.9,500 issues0 comments
reliability (Software)
[BUG] Cowork (Windows): all Plan9 shares fail with "Plan9 mount failed: invalid argument" after Windows update KB5124008 (26200.9445) — uninstalling the KB fixe
Feature Request: Auto-resume CLI session when usage limit resets
Please deobfuscate the Python
[Bug] MLX version of Gemma 4 26B fails to load: "Model type gemma4 not supported" (macOS)
# 233 Developers Discussed Abandoning the Office Add-in Platform — An Open Letter on the Office.js Stability, Security & Trust Crisis
[FEATURE] Allow users to configure which shell the Bash tool uses or inherit initial shell
Admin Materials and Surfaces
AMD Support
Thanks for the article.
Thanks for the article. I apologize in advance if this is a hijack, but I've really been trying to understand the craze of CI and feel this is a good place to hopefully get answers. CI is something I have a constant struggle with. I primarily work in small teams and I tend to work with other developers that are diligent about running tests and know that "if the tests aren't green when I merge master into my topic branch, I don't push to master." When I did work on a larger team, maybe CI was useful for the other programmers that weren't as diligent. Though, the CI box eventually got quite slow and you didn't get feedback until 15 minutes later (this was Jenkins) versus 2-3 minutes locally. Unless I'm missing something, I guess when you distill CI down to what it does you get: - Runs your test suite - Lets you know if a failure happens That's not a ton of value in my eyes, which is why I assume all of these hosted CI solutions are now also doing CD upon successful builds. You could also get CD without CI by using something like git hooks that kick off deploy scripts after certain events. GitHub showing the status of your CI on the PR screen is cool, but while I do use GitHub, I mostly use GitHub as a code repository. The most I do in the web UI is clone repos and open pull requests. If you merge a branch into master that correlates to an open PR, GitHub automatically closes the PR for you. I know we're in the era of "Automate ALL the things!" and I'm good about that, but typing `rake|make|etc` into my console isn't a huge pain point in my life right now. Is CI a luxury we've been brainwashed to love by the programming hegemony? Someone please let me know what I'm missing.
Comments (0)
No comments yet. Start the discussion.