I'm thinking of creating a project, which I probably handle as "independent" (CM) As possibly can. Through this I just do not mean automation through script / tool - although it is definitely included in it, it is a project topic of very chaos and therefore "total" automation will not be realistic.
What I want to do here:
Anyone should be able to build (with some automation and some documentation / guidelines) - for example - a newbie chief minister, or There is even no developer who is with the experience of the Chief Minister.
My first idea is to get this:
-
Issuing the build request process (through build form that receives all the necessary details for the construction So that someone's head not only lacks the scales)
-
To simplify the build steps so that they capture them as a sequence of commands in a simple documentation To go with the construction of a trained monkey - You should be able to (do not throw offense well - but you get this idea :-))
-
Fully describe the features of the device (read AN, SVN) That potential issues have been well-nurtured in advance and also help in providing better alerts in case of failures / problems.
-
If the project manager wants to be sick or sometimes to get a holiday, the project manager for a few days without any mention during the panic attacks every day. :-)
I would be happy to have some ideas and ideas to help me in this direction. Thanks all!
We call this "Bob Builder" as anti-pattern. The good news is that Bob (you) wants to get out of the loop when the build man can not go on vacation or he may get sick without some parts of the procedure, then there really is an unacceptable problem. If I am a betting, as you start the procedure to simplify the process of "trained monkey", then you will be surprised if you are smart, why are you spending your time and really add
- Any request for construction, or all kinds of construction, go through a person or small team
- Answers to these build requests annoyingly to the developers Security is if the build team is at lunch, they wait for hours.
- Bob, or Bob's team, spend a significant percentage of their time in doing chores.
- Bob is going home for the day, going for lunch, going on holiday , Or getting sick in the team's ability to work.
We ask our customers to push all of this type of things into their automation. It should not be a problem to use different types of two types of machines, different build numbers, etc.
The first step is to empty the process as much as possible to get out of the complexity so that you can get into the "trained monkey" process once you come near something, then the monkey with the computer is much easier is.
I give more specific advice, but I do not think you have told us where the complexity comes from, except for chaos, sometimes in this situation you have to attack chaotic and bad behavior Required. Are you doing this as "the source code in the base line and those two files and these three files?" It would be difficult and perhaps a CMER in the loop would be required to find a way to stop it. "Create a branch, and make specific changes in that branch" with the construction of the monkey is constructed.
You should be able to argue for those changes in the form of high risk. Even if you are good, you will have bad days and want to make a person's mistake from the equation as much as possible. Also, if you are shooting rapidly for developers and self service (which is likely to develop and manage), some things will need to be automable / closing.
Better form is good at interim, and it is always good to use your equipment, but I attack the "trained monkey" problem very aggressively by whatever trained monkey (or computer) Can not be a candidate to quit the process. Once you make it under the "trained monkey" situation, then get automation in your construction so that neither you nor the developers need monkeys. This turns your role from "Bob Builder" into "Bob the Build System Master".
Comments
Post a Comment