Continuous Delivery and DevOps in a legacy organization

I've been using the term legacy organization. My definition of a legacy organization is a slow changing organization that separates professions in silos. The slow changing nature can but doesn't have to be due to sizes. The separation of professions into silos materializes into a process where responsibility is handed over from profession to profession.

I have intentionally put development and test into same box. In some legacy organization you see theses separated into two silos where development hands over to a QA department which tests the application. I don't want to say its impossible to do continuous delivery with that type of setup because nothing is impossible. It requires the development organization to start taking responsibility for testing. It can be done by smart recruiting of developers with test focus but its going to be hard.

I refere to the above setup as legacy noDevOps organization because it separates development and operations and suffers heavily from the wall of confusion syndrome but it is an organization where test driven development is possible. Two of the biggest issues in a legacy noDevOps organization is the gunpoint standoff and droped responsibility at the wall. The standoff results in unconstructive blame games and lack of constructive change.

The dropped responsibility comes when development just wants out of responsibility at the point of handoff. Project managers want to close the project. Developers want to do new cool stuff. So development picks a few members who get to run at the wall when the rest hide. At the wall the mudball of a deliverable is tossed over the wall hoping that someone on the other side catches it.

A lot of talks and writeups on continuous delivery more or less assume a DevOps organization. Its definately much easier since continuous delivery requires the uses of same deployment mechanisms in all environment, which in turn puts a high requirement on similarity in infrastructure . Building a good process without the help of the direct involvement of the infrastructure experts in the operations organization is extremely hard. Doing continuous delivery well requires a higher level of continuous responsibility by the developers. DevOps allows developers to take responsibility in production, which is hard in legacy noDevOps organizations. So yes obviously continuous delivery is made so much easier with DevOps.

But what should we do? Should we just sitt there and wait till a manager calls a meeting and says we are gonna start doing DevOps and CD. If that happens then the DevOps is gonna be so full of friction because our professions are still at gunpoint standoff. So before anything gets done everyone needs to lower their guns and start trusting each other, this will take time.

Its my firm belief that the standoff is always the "fault" of the development organization. If we would have been delivering high enough quality in a stable enough application then there would not have been any standoff and there would have been trust. We can argue all we want that it's not possible to deliver enough stability and quality from a development organization without help and change from operations but it's beside my point. We can only change our own behavior and we can only do that by being the change we want to see.

If we want to deploy more often in order to archive higher quality then we make sure to hold our end of the bargain, higher quality and stability deliveries. We start by taking active responsibility for quality and stability through continuous regression testing. We test our deployments one million times if that's what it takes to make a stable deployment. We I prove with each delivery. We take pride in learning from our mistakes and automating tests to ensure they don't happen again. Then overtime the trust will increase and the teams will start cooperating more and more.

The development organization is in charge of the full delivery process up to the wall of confusion. So make it the best delivery possible and take pride in delivering high quality out of the development silo. For each successful delivery you bring the wall down one brick at the time.

Also remember that we are talking about continuous delivery, not deployment. It's super important not to ever speak about continuous deployment because it scares the living crap out of the ops team when in a standoff situation. Though always having a deliverable ready and tested at the wall is always going to be appreciated. Then transition into production can happen with less confusion.

I have to confess I'm one of the developers who hates to support an in production application. I fear to be on call and once an application is in production I want to change assignment. Reason is how legacy noDevOps organizations go about developer support. Developers have zero trust so we can't access logs, databases or anything in production. So each time a developer needs to help out with a production issue its with tied hands and a blind fold. It ends up becoming a hostage situation where the developer is held hostage. I love to trace down bugs, solve issues and improve stuff but to be able to do that I need my eyes, my brain and my hands.

We can take charge of this situation as well and stop beeing victims. We can drastically improve our situation by building monitoring and metrics into our application and verifying them as part of our continuous regression testing. This way we build tools that are gonna be available in production that operations are gonna require anyway. Usually these are added late and as low priority supplemental requirements from operations. By being proactive we can build this into our architecture, test process and use it through out our entire delivery process. This way we build more useful monitoring tools that we understand much better. In return we arnt as blind and handicapped when helping out with production issues. Once again we make active steps towards cooperation and trust between organizations while making our own life better.

DevOps makes continuous delivery easier. But continuous delivery can be how we drop the guns and tear down the wall of confusion in a legacy organization and move towards DevOps. Ultimately they should both exist in an organization and I think they will both become as common as agile even in large old organizations.

How ever until we are there I think that continuous delivery is a fantastic tool to enable change in an organization suffering from a deadlock. It requires courage, vision, ambition and patience but all the tools are there for us to start making that change today!