We Should Have Done THIS When Writing The Continuous Delivery Book | Jez Humble & Dave Farley

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 3 фев 2025

Комментарии • 16

  • @bernardleclerc3801
    @bernardleclerc3801 Год назад +11

    Thanks so much Dave and Jez for this talk. I appreciate the humble views on your own book. That being said, have you considered updating the book by creating a "second" edition ?

  • @davidjohnson7613
    @davidjohnson7613 Год назад +4

    Thanks for the book guys. Over the years I’ve introduced it to every new team I’ve worked with.

  • @miguelangelsimonfernandez5498
    @miguelangelsimonfernandez5498 Год назад +2

    Thanks, now I need to book time to watch the full episode. Security is key.

  • @istovall2624
    @istovall2624 Год назад +3

    I have dyslexia and I always read it as "contentious delivery" first. I kind of like it.

  • @blaiseutube
    @blaiseutube Год назад

    I have a lot to say on the topic.
    The book is more relevant now than when it first came out because there is more access to tools.
    Now that you have opened the conversation, I'll prepare a more comprehensive summary.

  • @nareshtank7430
    @nareshtank7430 Год назад

    thank you guys for amazing book. currently I am reading the book. I had to skip most of build chapter because I am working as NodeJs and I didn't get much of it.

  • @JoeTaber
    @JoeTaber Год назад

    Add it and release a second edition :)

  • @LucTaylor
    @LucTaylor Год назад

    I guess you could make a version 2. When Niels Ferguson released version 2 of Practical Cryptography, it has changed so much he decided to just give it a new title. lol

  • @orterves
    @orterves Год назад +1

    "Non-functional requirements" always struck me a such a bad name. As if they are not fundamental to the functioning of the software.
    I'm not sure what would work best - maybe "Base-functional" / "Extra-functional" / "Super-functional" or similar?
    Anything that would get people (project managers and up, particularly) to keep them in mind as the basis on which the functional requirements depend, rather than as an afterthought

    • @ContinuousDelivery
      @ContinuousDelivery  Год назад +4

      I think this is probably a good topic for a video 🤔
      I have covered the related topic of "Technical Stories" before - ruclips.net/video/vSuJqMRG1WM/видео.html
      I think that the reason that we treat "NFRs", and I agree that this is a terrible name for them, differently is because they are cross-cutting, that is you can't "make secure" or "make fast enough" in isolation as a single task, but that is the difference, that they are cross-cutting, not that they aren't functional, or that the user doesn't care. I'd certainly choose to use a service that was secure, resilient and performant, over an otherwise functionally better system that was none of those things. So users do care about these features of the system too!

  • @edgeeffect
    @edgeeffect Год назад +3

    Is this a build-up to a second edition?
    Best click-bait ever... put a swear word in the thumbnail. ;)
    The talk of Java tool-chains and Maven made me wince... I've been slogging my way through the "slough of despond" that is Gradle recently and raising my eyes to heaven and asking "why?"

  • @BryonLape
    @BryonLape Год назад +1

    I love encountering people who believe CD can be done within Scrum. It quite literally cannot. Scrum is a CD anti-pattern.

    • @StevenBorrie
      @StevenBorrie Год назад +1

      Scrum is a method for organising a team and a backlog of tasks - CD doesn't really require any specific workflow there. You can absolutely follow scrum and maintain software that is always ready to be released. Scrum and CD are orthogonal.

  • @talananiyiyaya8912
    @talananiyiyaya8912 Год назад

    Book is kinda mid fr. No cap finna write my own