dgarciaf18

this is peak rabbithole material

I don't think the idea of circular economy, where goods are produced with high manufacturing quality standards, applies to software. In the sense that producing high quality physical goods may not be beneficial for the producer. But producing high quality software is rarely not beneficial for the developer, specially in the long term.

Maybe idea could be maybe applied to the offering of long-term technical support and backwards-compatibility (in terms of durability of the software) and open source (in terms of reusability of the software).

Production code should never depend on the attention of "the oldest guy in the office". We used to have methods not to break stuff: extensive automated testing, monitoring, QA, canary deployments, A/B testing. And, ultimately, a rollback plan. Building production-grade application should not be a one-man (or one-agent) job. Back in the pre-AI era software also used to break when you did not have proper testing and release processes.

The naming is... interesting. If the CI/CD pipeline fails, you get a pushie.

Jokes aside, the tool looks very convenient. I have the CI/CD use case in mind. Having a GH actions template would be nice.

Have you considered publishing the code? Some people will certainly be reluctant to use the platform without seeing what it actually does with their logs, which may contain sensitive data.

Do they even have automated testing? This should have been detected not only in one layer of the release process, but in serveral ones.