How do you end up with 200 yaml file “basic deployments” without anyone looking up from their keyboard and muttering “guys what are we doing”?
Honestly they could have picked any stack as next one because the key win here was starting from scratch
Honestly they could have picked any stack as next one because the key win here was starting from scratch
My suspicion is the original environment (47 Kubernetes clusters, 200 YAML files, unreliable deployments, using 3 clouds, etc.) was not planned out. You probably had multiple teams provisioning infrastructure, half completed projects, and even dead clusters (clusters which were used once but were not destroyed when they were no longer used).
I give the DevOps team in the article a lot of credit for increasing reliability, reducing costs, and increasing efficiency. They did good work.
Out of curiosity, in what case would you _not_ see 200 files for 200 services? Even with Helm, you'd write a chart per app wouldn't you?
We could have spent a tiny fraction of that 10-dev-months to deploy something to production on a bare VM on any cloud platform in a secure and probably very-scalable way.
These days I cringe and shudder everytime I hear someone mentions writing "helm charts", or using the word "workloads".
I see this happening all the time and unless you really have DevOps or SysAdmins who are feel acting like 'assholes' enforcing rules it is going to be like that.
Of course 'assholes' is in quotes because they have to be firm and deny a lot fo crap to keep setup clean - but then also they will be assholes for some that "just want to do stuff".