... and leave ops/ devops / are team to pick up the pieces (or put the pieces together) because now your too busy to iterate because your shipping another new thing?
2. When waterfall delivers the wrong thing because the requirements from two years ago weren't updated to reflect two years of new reality, someone has to pick up the pieces from that, too. It may not be devops - it might be sales instead. But it's still a problem.
Recurring operational issues get fixed mighty quickly when J. Dev has to wake up a few times at 02:00 on Saturday.
Heck, design and architectural issues suddenly get a lot of scrutiny at the whiteboard phase and people decide they don't really need Kafka or Kubernetes or Mesos or GenAI anymore.
Compliance is a set of stories/tickets/requirements like any other, with a priority to be assigned and eventually worked and reworked at some point in the process. There’s nothing wrong with not addressing it as the first thing - it just blocks release. With that, it will eventually get worked on, hopefully at the time where the pieces that need it are understood and the work to reach it is understood.
It doesn't seem to have changed much as far as the architecture process goes though. With a few exceptions, the things that pop up for support to handle are usually either 'something broke on the content side, and the editors can't fix it', or a third party broke (glares at Google and Tag Manager, Musk and Twitter/X, etc)