Back to the discussion of calling yourself a 'devops': I put devops in my job title on linkedin a couple weeks back (devops manager). Since then I've gotten several pretty solid recruiter queries for exactly that term.
So, it seems like recruiters are definitely sniffing around for 'devops X'. Food for thought.
> Back to the discussion of calling yourself a 'devops': I put devops in > my job title on linkedin a couple weeks back (devops manager). Since > then I've gotten several pretty solid recruiter queries for exactly that > term.
> So, it seems like recruiters are definitely sniffing around for 'devops > X'. Food for thought.
> Back to the discussion of calling yourself a 'devops': I put devops in > my job title on linkedin a couple weeks back (devops manager). Since > then I've gotten several pretty solid recruiter queries for exactly that > term.
> So, it seems like recruiters are definitely sniffing around for 'devops > X'. Food for thought.
On Mar 2, 2012, at 10:55 AM, Philip J. Hollenback wrote:
> Back to the discussion of calling yourself a 'devops': I put devops in > my job title on linkedin a couple weeks back (devops manager). Since > then I've gotten several pretty solid recruiter queries for exactly that > term.
> So, it seems like recruiters are definitely sniffing around for 'devops > X'. Food for thought.
Never underestimate the power of a fully loaded buzzword.
I don't mean that to be snarky, just a recognition of reality.
> Back to the discussion of calling yourself a 'devops': I put devops in > my job title on linkedin a couple weeks back (devops manager). Since > then I've gotten several pretty solid recruiter queries for exactly that > term.
> So, it seems like recruiters are definitely sniffing around for 'devops > X'. Food for thought.
On Fri, Mar 2, 2012, at 10:01 AM, Glenn Brown wrote: > any recruiter buzz for "Hired Goon?" :)
> On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 9:55 AM, Philip J. Hollenback <phil...@pobox.com> > wrote: > > Back to the discussion of calling yourself a 'devops': I put devops in > > my job title on linkedin a couple weeks back (devops manager). Since > > then I've gotten several pretty solid recruiter queries for exactly that > > term.
> > So, it seems like recruiters are definitely sniffing around for 'devops > > X'. Food for thought.
> > P. > > -- > > Philip J. Hollenback > > www.hollenback.net > > @philiph
To add a bit of data myself both on my blog post[1] and on a linkedin discussion[2] I've had a few recruiters jumping in that did know their thing and were looking for the real stuff, but couldn't find it. Having spent quite some time with a few of them I must say that if you take a step back and look at their job it's a hard task without a term of reference. They told me they looked for syadmins and in most of those cases they weren't getting what they wanted (more CI, Cloud etc). That is not to say that some recruiters don't play stupid keyword matching games and don't go beyond that, or that some sysadmins don't know about CI/Cloud, but the experience of these people seems to confirm Devops is a useful qualifier in a job title for both ends.
More in a blog post coming soon on your screens if you decide to click on the link.
cheers,
Spike
[1] http://www.spikelab.org/devops-job-title/ [2] apparently the group is members only and I can't share the discussion, fail :/ , but if you are a member look for 'What do you think about DevOps as part of a job title?'
> Back to the discussion of calling yourself a 'devops': I put devops in > my job title on linkedin a couple weeks back (devops manager). Since > then I've gotten several pretty solid recruiter queries for exactly that > term.
> So, it seems like recruiters are definitely sniffing around for 'devops > X'. Food for thought.
> Back to the discussion of calling yourself a 'devops': I put devops in > my job title on linkedin a couple weeks back (devops manager). Since > then I've gotten several pretty solid recruiter queries for exactly that > term.
> So, it seems like recruiters are definitely sniffing around for 'devops > X'. Food for thought.
> It is absolutely no sense to call yourself "devops x".
> Best Regards,
> Guillaume FORTAINE
> On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 4:55 PM, Philip J. Hollenback<phil...@pobox.com> wrote: >> Back to the discussion of calling yourself a 'devops': I put devops in >> my job title on linkedin a couple weeks back (devops manager). Since >> then I've gotten several pretty solid recruiter queries for exactly that >> term.
>> So, it seems like recruiters are definitely sniffing around for 'devops >> X'. Food for thought.
All cultural shifts evolve into tangible things and produce pragmatic ways. Hanging on to the notion DevOps is just culture (and I'm not even sure there's a valid reason for wanting to) is a little idealistic.
That said I really just see DevOps as a combination of skill sets - distributing both ways - and the _active_ collaboration to deliver the highest quality product or service. I've not yet been convinced it makes sense to have DevOps be a position, job title, or department. But, I'm definitely not fighting the direction this thing goes.
> > It is absolutely no sense to call yourself "devops x".
> > Best Regards,
> > Guillaume FORTAINE
> > On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 4:55 PM, Philip J. Hollenback<phil...@pobox.com (mailto:phil...@pobox.com)> wrote: > > > Back to the discussion of calling yourself a 'devops': I put devops in > > > my job title on linkedin a couple weeks back (devops manager). Since > > > then I've gotten several pretty solid recruiter queries for exactly that > > > term.
> > > So, it seems like recruiters are definitely sniffing around for 'devops > > > X'. Food for thought.
Development Operations Engineer (not common at all).
I personally do not believe that devops is a culture, or if it is: I am a culture too. I am an culture? I am the culture.
I am a development operations specialized systems engineer; Chef is my rifle. All this being said, I can identify non-devops system administrators pretty quickly -- what does that mean?
--AJ
On 4 March 2012 08:53, Paul Graydon <paulgray...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> I may be going to that annoying 4 year old place, but I have to ask:
> Why?
> Why is devops a culture and not a job?
> Why can it not also be a job, a department, a team?
> Paul
> On 3/3/2012 2:58 AM, Guillaume FORTAINE wrote:
>> Hello,
>> devops is a culture not a job.
>> It is absolutely no sense to call yourself "devops x".
>> Best Regards,
>> Guillaume FORTAINE
>> On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 4:55 PM, Philip J. Hollenback<phil...@pobox.com> >> wrote:
>>> Back to the discussion of calling yourself a 'devops': I put devops in >>> my job title on linkedin a couple weeks back (devops manager). Since >>> then I've gotten several pretty solid recruiter queries for exactly that >>> term.
>>> So, it seems like recruiters are definitely sniffing around for 'devops >>> X'. Food for thought.
>>> P. >>> -- >>> Philip J. Hollenback >>> www.hollenback.net >>> @philiph
On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 12:13 PM, AJ Christensen <a...@junglist.gen.nz> wrote: > I've been called or calling myself things like:
> Development Operations Technical Lead
> Development Operations Systems Engineer
> Systems Engineer (devops)
> Development Operations Engineer (not common at all).
> I personally do not believe that devops is a culture, or if it is: I > am a culture too. I am an culture? I am the culture.
> I am a development operations specialized systems engineer; Chef is my > rifle. All this being said, I can identify non-devops system > administrators pretty quickly -- what does that mean?
> --AJ
> On 4 March 2012 08:53, Paul Graydon <paulgray...@googlemail.com> wrote: >> I may be going to that annoying 4 year old place, but I have to ask:
>> Why?
>> Why is devops a culture and not a job?
>> Why can it not also be a job, a department, a team?
>> Paul
>> On 3/3/2012 2:58 AM, Guillaume FORTAINE wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>> devops is a culture not a job.
>>> It is absolutely no sense to call yourself "devops x".
>>> Best Regards,
>>> Guillaume FORTAINE
>>> On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 4:55 PM, Philip J. Hollenback<phil...@pobox.com> >>> wrote:
>>>> Back to the discussion of calling yourself a 'devops': I put devops in >>>> my job title on linkedin a couple weeks back (devops manager). Since >>>> then I've gotten several pretty solid recruiter queries for exactly that >>>> term.
>>>> So, it seems like recruiters are definitely sniffing around for 'devops >>>> X'. Food for thought.
>>>> P. >>>> -- >>>> Philip J. Hollenback >>>> www.hollenback.net >>>> @philiph
On Saturday, March 3, 2012, Kit Plummer <kplum...@maestrodev.com> wrote: > All cultural shifts evolve into tangible things and produce pragmatic
ways. Hanging on to the notion DevOps is just culture (and I'm not even sure there's a valid reason for wanting to) is a little idealistic.
> That said I really just see DevOps as a combination of skill sets -
distributing both ways - and the _active_ collaboration to deliver the highest quality product or service. I've not yet been convinced it makes sense to have DevOps be a position, job title, or department. But, I'm definitely not fighting the direction this thing goes.
> On Saturday, March 3, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Paul Graydon wrote:
> I may be going to that annoying 4 year old place, but I have to ask: > Why? > Why is devops a culture and not a job? > Why can it not also be a job, a department, a team? > Paul > On 3/3/2012 2:58 AM, Guillaume FORTAINE wrote:
> Hello, > devops is a culture not a job. > It is absolutely no sense to call yourself "devops x". > Best Regards, > Guillaume FORTAINE > On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 4:55 PM, Philip J. Hollenback<phil...@pobox.com> wrote:
> Back to the discussion of calling yourself a 'devops': I put devops in > my job title on linkedin a couple weeks back (devops manager). Since > then I've gotten several pretty solid recruiter queries for exactly that > term. > So, it seems like recruiters are definitely sniffing around for 'devops > X'. Food for thought. > P. > -- > Philip J. Hollenback > www.hollenback.net > @philiph
> All this being said, I can identify non-devops system
administrators pretty quickly -- what does that mean?
That means a lot. LOL
I think the emphasis on DevOps *as culture* is so that it doesn't get sucked up as a job title, because it isn't *a* job. It's a way of thinking and engaging the business of moving apps from inception of idea through production of usable feature (and then back around again) IMO
I am not surprised that people are using DevOps in a job title because it's the secret handshake to show they understand the deeper issue here: the business needs everyone working together, as a collaborative culture.
On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 3:13 PM, AJ Christensen <a...@junglist.gen.nz> wrote: > I've been called or calling myself things like:
> Development Operations Technical Lead
> Development Operations Systems Engineer
> Systems Engineer (devops)
> Development Operations Engineer (not common at all).
> I personally do not believe that devops is a culture, or if it is: I > am a culture too. I am an culture? I am the culture.
> I am a development operations specialized systems engineer; Chef is my > rifle. All this being said, I can identify non-devops system > administrators pretty quickly -- what does that mean?
> --AJ
> On 4 March 2012 08:53, Paul Graydon <paulgray...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > I may be going to that annoying 4 year old place, but I have to ask:
> > Why?
> > Why is devops a culture and not a job?
> > Why can it not also be a job, a department, a team?
> > Paul
> > On 3/3/2012 2:58 AM, Guillaume FORTAINE wrote:
> >> Hello,
> >> devops is a culture not a job.
> >> It is absolutely no sense to call yourself "devops x".
> >> Best Regards,
> >> Guillaume FORTAINE
> >> On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 4:55 PM, Philip J. Hollenback<phil...@pobox.com> > >> wrote:
> >>> Back to the discussion of calling yourself a 'devops': I put devops in > >>> my job title on linkedin a couple weeks back (devops manager). Since > >>> then I've gotten several pretty solid recruiter queries for exactly > that > >>> term.
> >>> So, it seems like recruiters are definitely sniffing around for 'devops > >>> X'. Food for thought.
> >>> P. > >>> -- > >>> Philip J. Hollenback > >>> www.hollenback.net > >>> @philiph
On Sat, Mar 3, 2012, at 01:56 PM, Chad Woolley wrote: > Devops is ponies. Maybe rainbows too.
> On Saturday, March 3, 2012, Kit Plummer <kplum...@maestrodev.com> wrote: > > All cultural shifts evolve into tangible things and produce pragmatic > ways. Hanging on to the notion DevOps is just culture (and I'm not even > sure there's a valid reason for wanting to) is a little idealistic. > > That said I really just see DevOps as a combination of skill sets - > distributing both ways - and the _active_ collaboration to deliver the > highest quality product or service. I've not yet been convinced it makes > sense to have DevOps be a position, job title, or department. But, I'm > definitely not fighting the direction this thing goes. > > Kit
> > On Saturday, March 3, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Paul Graydon wrote:
> > I may be going to that annoying 4 year old place, but I have to ask: > > Why? > > Why is devops a culture and not a job? > > Why can it not also be a job, a department, a team? > > Paul > > On 3/3/2012 2:58 AM, Guillaume FORTAINE wrote:
> > Hello, > > devops is a culture not a job. > > It is absolutely no sense to call yourself "devops x". > > Best Regards, > > Guillaume FORTAINE > > On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 4:55 PM, Philip J. Hollenback<phil...@pobox.com> > wrote:
> > Back to the discussion of calling yourself a 'devops': I put devops in > > my job title on linkedin a couple weeks back (devops manager). Since > > then I've gotten several pretty solid recruiter queries for exactly that > > term. > > So, it seems like recruiters are definitely sniffing around for 'devops > > X'. Food for thought. > > P. > > -- > > Philip J. Hollenback > > www.hollenback.net > > @philiph
I agree with Spike - I don't think 'devops' by itself is a description of your job, but I do think it's a valid modifier - in the same way that I could be a hiphop manager.
If putting 'devops' in front of my title makes it so that I get more high-quality queries from recruiters, I'm all for it.
On Sat, Mar 3, 2012, at 01:02 PM, Kit Plummer wrote: > All cultural shifts evolve into tangible things and produce pragmatic > ways. Hanging on to the notion DevOps is just culture (and I'm not even > sure there's a valid reason for wanting to) is a little idealistic.
> That said I really just see DevOps as a combination of skill sets - > distributing both ways - and the _active_ collaboration to deliver the > highest quality product or service. I've not yet been convinced it makes > sense to have DevOps be a position, job title, or department. But, I'm > definitely not fighting the direction this thing goes.
> Kit
> On Saturday, March 3, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Paul Graydon wrote:
> > I may be going to that annoying 4 year old place, but I have to ask:
> > Why?
> > Why is devops a culture and not a job?
> > Why can it not also be a job, a department, a team?
> > > It is absolutely no sense to call yourself "devops x".
> > > Best Regards,
> > > Guillaume FORTAINE
> > > On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 4:55 PM, Philip J. Hollenback<phil...@pobox.com (mailto:phil...@pobox.com)> wrote: > > > > Back to the discussion of calling yourself a 'devops': I put devops in > > > > my job title on linkedin a couple weeks back (devops manager). Since > > > > then I've gotten several pretty solid recruiter queries for exactly that > > > > term.
> > > > So, it seems like recruiters are definitely sniffing around for 'devops > > > > X'. Food for thought.
Replying to multiple folks at once here so forgive the flow.
There is a very simple reason devops is not a title. Because devops is not something you do. Not only should devops NOT be a title, it should be avoided. Let me paint for you an entirely real scenario that I experienced personally.
Devops Team was created (of which I was a part). Our responsibility was to do all the "devops"-y things we all talk about. The SPECIFIC reason that the team had to be created was due to political isses around titles and departments and whatnot.
What was the end result?
Bitching from the "operations" team that "devops" broke something. Bitching from the "development" team that "devops" broke something.
Things I actually heard:
"That's not my responsibility. Devops did that" - An operations person "Devops broke that code" - A developer
Channeling a little Lord Cope here "That's fucking bullshit".
By creating a "devops" team or giving "devops" titles you've now created yet another bureaucracy. A whole NEW group of people to blame. Another scapegoat. At best, that's all you've done. At worst you've created actual animosity between folks you were trying to get to work together.
It's a path of failure. Yes, Devops is kind of a fucked up name. It's already apparent when people are like "well now we need SecDevOps or QADevOps or <insert some mashup of two different departments>.
The practices, cultural message, behaviors, toolchain or whatever that makes up what we call DevOps should be the norm not the exception. If you have lazy people who don't want to level up, they need to go. If you have people who can't get on board with the shifting world of IT, they are toxic to you and everyone else at your company.
I get that people have egos and need to feel unique and special. That's your responsibility. If you need a special title to tell you how you should be doing your job, then I have a bit of warning for you:
> I agree with Spike - I don't think 'devops' by itself is a description > of your job, but I do think it's a valid modifier - in the same way that > I could be a hiphop manager.
> If putting 'devops' in front of my title makes it so that I get more > high-quality queries from recruiters, I'm all for it.
> P.
> On Sat, Mar 3, 2012, at 01:02 PM, Kit Plummer wrote: >> All cultural shifts evolve into tangible things and produce pragmatic >> ways. Hanging on to the notion DevOps is just culture (and I'm not even >> sure there's a valid reason for wanting to) is a little idealistic.
>> That said I really just see DevOps as a combination of skill sets - >> distributing both ways - and the _active_ collaboration to deliver the >> highest quality product or service. I've not yet been convinced it makes >> sense to have DevOps be a position, job title, or department. But, I'm >> definitely not fighting the direction this thing goes.
>> Kit
>> On Saturday, March 3, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Paul Graydon wrote:
>> > I may be going to that annoying 4 year old place, but I have to ask:
>> > Why?
>> > Why is devops a culture and not a job?
>> > Why can it not also be a job, a department, a team?
>> > > It is absolutely no sense to call yourself "devops x".
>> > > Best Regards,
>> > > Guillaume FORTAINE
>> > > On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 4:55 PM, Philip J. Hollenback<phil...@pobox.com (mailto:phil...@pobox.com)> wrote: >> > > > Back to the discussion of calling yourself a 'devops': I put devops in >> > > > my job title on linkedin a couple weeks back (devops manager). Since >> > > > then I've gotten several pretty solid recruiter queries for exactly that >> > > > term.
>> > > > So, it seems like recruiters are definitely sniffing around for 'devops >> > > > X'. Food for thought.
John Vincent <lusis....@gmail.com> wrote: > Bitching from the "operations" team that "devops" broke something. > Bitching from the "development" team that "devops" broke something.
If you created a "DevOps" team but kept separate "operations" and "development" teams... then you're doing it wrong. :-)
On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 9:48 PM, Jan Schaumann <jscha...@netmeister.org> wrote: > John Vincent <lusis....@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Bitching from the "operations" team that "devops" broke something. >> Bitching from the "development" team that "devops" broke something.
> If you created a "DevOps" team but kept separate "operations" and > "development" teams... then you're doing it wrong. :-)
> -Jan
You've obviously never worked in a company with more than, say, 10 people ;) I only partially kid. It's unrealistic and naive to think that an existing company of any size can mash two teams up like that at the drop of a hat. Let's not even consider the fact that the person managing operations may be grossly unqualified to manage developers.
But you're proving my point. The reason devops isn't a title, team or department is that it doesn't just apply to devops. It's about aligning ALL of IT with the business - not just development as agile promised.
What about someone who works at a company with NO development team? Yes those places exist. Would you tell the guy who manages all of his infra with puppet that he's not a "devops" because he's not interacting with a development team? I would say he's more 'devops' than most.
On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 9:54 PM, John Vincent <lusis....@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 9:48 PM, Jan Schaumann <jscha...@netmeister.org> wrote: >> John Vincent <lusis....@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Bitching from the "operations" team that "devops" broke something. >>> Bitching from the "development" team that "devops" broke something.
>> If you created a "DevOps" team but kept separate "operations" and >> "development" teams... then you're doing it wrong. :-)
>> -Jan
> You've obviously never worked in a company with more than, say, 10 > people ;) I only partially kid. It's unrealistic and naive to think > that an existing company of any size can mash two teams up like that > at the drop of a hat. Let's not even consider the fact that the person > managing operations may be grossly unqualified to manage developers.
> But you're proving my point. The reason devops isn't a title, team or > department is that it doesn't just apply to devops. It's about > aligning ALL of IT with the business - not just development as agile > promised.
> What about someone who works at a company with NO development team? > Yes those places exist. Would you tell the guy who manages all of his > infra with puppet that he's not a "devops" because he's not > interacting with a development team? I would say he's more 'devops' > than most.
> For the record, I still think devops is the greatest thing since nutella.
> On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 9:54 PM, John Vincent <lusis....@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 9:48 PM, Jan Schaumann <jscha...@netmeister.org> wrote: >>> John Vincent <lusis....@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Bitching from the "operations" team that "devops" broke something. >>>> Bitching from the "development" team that "devops" broke something.
>>> If you created a "DevOps" team but kept separate "operations" and >>> "development" teams... then you're doing it wrong. :-)
>>> -Jan
>> You've obviously never worked in a company with more than, say, 10 >> people ;) I only partially kid. It's unrealistic and naive to think >> that an existing company of any size can mash two teams up like that >> at the drop of a hat. Let's not even consider the fact that the person >> managing operations may be grossly unqualified to manage developers.
>> But you're proving my point. The reason devops isn't a title, team or >> department is that it doesn't just apply to devops. It's about >> aligning ALL of IT with the business - not just development as agile >> promised.
>> What about someone who works at a company with NO development team? >> Yes those places exist. Would you tell the guy who manages all of his >> infra with puppet that he's not a "devops" because he's not >> interacting with a development team? I would say he's more 'devops' >> than most.
> I don't get it. I do development and operations, at the same time. All day.
> --AJ
> On 4 March 2012 10:57, John Vincent <lusis....@gmail.com> wrote: >> For the record, I still think devops is the greatest thing since nutella.
>> On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 9:54 PM, John Vincent <lusis....@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 9:48 PM, Jan Schaumann <jscha...@netmeister.org> wrote: >>>> John Vincent <lusis....@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Bitching from the "operations" team that "devops" broke something. >>>>> Bitching from the "development" team that "devops" broke something.
>>>> If you created a "DevOps" team but kept separate "operations" and >>>> "development" teams... then you're doing it wrong. :-)
>>>> -Jan
>>> You've obviously never worked in a company with more than, say, 10 >>> people ;) I only partially kid. It's unrealistic and naive to think >>> that an existing company of any size can mash two teams up like that >>> at the drop of a hat. Let's not even consider the fact that the person >>> managing operations may be grossly unqualified to manage developers.
>>> But you're proving my point. The reason devops isn't a title, team or >>> department is that it doesn't just apply to devops. It's about >>> aligning ALL of IT with the business - not just development as agile >>> promised.
>>> What about someone who works at a company with NO development team? >>> Yes those places exist. Would you tell the guy who manages all of his >>> infra with puppet that he's not a "devops" because he's not >>> interacting with a development team? I would say he's more 'devops' >>> than most.
> Here's another cool one: ask a > non-IT-side-of-the-business-managerial-type what he thinks > "operations" is.
> --AJ
> On 4 March 2012 11:03, AJ Christensen <a...@junglist.gen.nz> wrote: >> I don't get it. I do development and operations, at the same time. All day.
>> --AJ
>> On 4 March 2012 10:57, John Vincent <lusis....@gmail.com> wrote: >>> For the record, I still think devops is the greatest thing since nutella.
>>> On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 9:54 PM, John Vincent <lusis....@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 9:48 PM, Jan Schaumann <jscha...@netmeister.org> wrote: >>>>> John Vincent <lusis....@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Bitching from the "operations" team that "devops" broke something. >>>>>> Bitching from the "development" team that "devops" broke something.
>>>>> If you created a "DevOps" team but kept separate "operations" and >>>>> "development" teams... then you're doing it wrong. :-)
>>>>> -Jan
>>>> You've obviously never worked in a company with more than, say, 10 >>>> people ;) I only partially kid. It's unrealistic and naive to think >>>> that an existing company of any size can mash two teams up like that >>>> at the drop of a hat. Let's not even consider the fact that the person >>>> managing operations may be grossly unqualified to manage developers.
>>>> But you're proving my point. The reason devops isn't a title, team or >>>> department is that it doesn't just apply to devops. It's about >>>> aligning ALL of IT with the business - not just development as agile >>>> promised.
>>>> What about someone who works at a company with NO development team? >>>> Yes those places exist. Would you tell the guy who manages all of his >>>> infra with puppet that he's not a "devops" because he's not >>>> interacting with a development team? I would say he's more 'devops' >>>> than most.
Now that I've read this I agree it might be dangerous to use devops in your real job title at work. However, John it sounds like your company had some deeper problems that would probably exist no matter what titles you use, right?
Maybe there are two separate things here: the title you put on yourself online so recruiters can find you, versus the title you use in your job. I know I don't formally call myself a devops manager at work.
On Sat, Mar 3, 2012, at 09:41 PM, John Vincent wrote: > Replying to multiple folks at once here so forgive the flow.
> There is a very simple reason devops is not a title. Because devops is > not something you do. Not only should devops NOT be a title, it should > be avoided. Let me paint for you an entirely real scenario that I > experienced personally.
> Devops Team was created (of which I was a part). Our responsibility > was to do all the "devops"-y things we all talk about. The SPECIFIC > reason that the team had to be created was due to political isses > around titles and departments and whatnot.
> What was the end result?
> Bitching from the "operations" team that "devops" broke something. > Bitching from the "development" team that "devops" broke something.
> Things I actually heard:
> "That's not my responsibility. Devops did that" - An operations person > "Devops broke that code" - A developer
> Channeling a little Lord Cope here "That's fucking bullshit".
> By creating a "devops" team or giving "devops" titles you've now > created yet another bureaucracy. A whole NEW group of people to blame. > Another scapegoat. At best, that's all you've done. At worst you've > created actual animosity between folks you were trying to get to work > together.
> It's a path of failure. Yes, Devops is kind of a fucked up name. It's > already apparent when people are like "well now we need SecDevOps or > QADevOps or <insert some mashup of two different departments>.
> The practices, cultural message, behaviors, toolchain or whatever that > makes up what we call DevOps should be the norm not the exception. If > you have lazy people who don't want to level up, they need to go. If > you have people who can't get on board with the shifting world of IT, > they are toxic to you and everyone else at your company.
> I get that people have egos and need to feel unique and special. > That's your responsibility. If you need a special title to tell you > how you should be doing your job, then I have a bit of warning for > you:
> On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 9:23 PM, Philip J. Hollenback <phil...@pobox.com> > wrote: > > I agree with Spike - I don't think 'devops' by itself is a description > > of your job, but I do think it's a valid modifier - in the same way that > > I could be a hiphop manager.
> > If putting 'devops' in front of my title makes it so that I get more > > high-quality queries from recruiters, I'm all for it.
> > P.
> > On Sat, Mar 3, 2012, at 01:02 PM, Kit Plummer wrote: > >> All cultural shifts evolve into tangible things and produce pragmatic > >> ways. Hanging on to the notion DevOps is just culture (and I'm not even > >> sure there's a valid reason for wanting to) is a little idealistic.
> >> That said I really just see DevOps as a combination of skill sets - > >> distributing both ways - and the _active_ collaboration to deliver the > >> highest quality product or service. I've not yet been convinced it makes > >> sense to have DevOps be a position, job title, or department. But, I'm > >> definitely not fighting the direction this thing goes.
> >> Kit
> >> On Saturday, March 3, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Paul Graydon wrote:
> >> > I may be going to that annoying 4 year old place, but I have to ask:
> >> > Why?
> >> > Why is devops a culture and not a job?
> >> > Why can it not also be a job, a department, a team?
> >> > > It is absolutely no sense to call yourself "devops x".
> >> > > Best Regards,
> >> > > Guillaume FORTAINE
> >> > > On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 4:55 PM, Philip J. Hollenback<phil...@pobox.com (mailto:phil...@pobox.com)> wrote: > >> > > > Back to the discussion of calling yourself a 'devops': I put devops in > >> > > > my job title on linkedin a couple weeks back (devops manager). Since > >> > > > then I've gotten several pretty solid recruiter queries for exactly that > >> > > > term.
> >> > > > So, it seems like recruiters are definitely sniffing around for 'devops > >> > > > X'. Food for thought.
Did nobody read the thread before this point? I thought we had a pretty pragmatic understanding going.
1. Sure, IMO DevOps is in its origin a term for the culture of developer/operations collaboration, or even more profoundly the incorporation of operations into the actual company's value chain as opposed to being some weird trolls in the basement kept around for "cost of doing business" reasons. John, you're right to say some places don't have devs. One of the ways I initially got our ops team a seat at the big boy table at NI was by approaching the business directly to accomplish projects for them that didn't really require a developer team - they were just used to handing any implementation to the devs.
1a. However, diluting DevOps into "it means everyone collaborates with everyone" or "it's IT aligning with the business" is counterproductive. Those ideas have been around a while and for some reason have failed to produce the results that DevOps is. DevOps is specifically focused on operations and for a reason.
2. However, it's also evolved into a reasonably defined skill set that those of us who actually hire people want to identify and attract and recruit. Posting for "DevOps Systems Engineer" is a signal that significantly improves the fit of the talent that's responding to postings to the kind of job we have (which is, you know, devopsey). And it's more than "I touched the puppet", it's a way of working. In the end, I need to post a job someone will see and think "oh, that's my deal, I should apply" and I need to read someone's resume and quickly determine "I want to talk to them." Concise words have power in that domain.
3. Large companies. Well, actually, qualifying "Operations" potentially as "Developer Operations" is helpful, as we have Sales Operations and Content Operations and about a dozen other "Operations" teams in any org of any size. On the multiple groups problem - before we had the word "DevOps," at NI we had a "Web Admin" team that sat between the dev teams and the by-tech infrastructure teams (unix, windows, network, etc.). And that was painful. We weren't sufficiently aligned with/embedded in the dev teams, and the infra teams couldn't understand why a working Web system didn't magically emerge from them just tossing all their technical parts into the mixer. However, the reason it was difficult was because we didn't understand how to effectively collaborate with the devs, and the infrastructure teams didn't want to collaborate. So? It's like agile doesn't work if the devs and product managers are oppositional c*ckknockers instead of working together for the common good.
So yes, we could call it "a collaboration focused approach to both altering the way we do operations to adopt some best practices coming out of the development world, and integrating better with partner teams with an understanding that we are trying to bring value to the business" - but some Belgian guy came up with a less tongue-twisty way to say that.
>On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 9:48 PM, Jan Schaumann <jscha...@netmeister.org> wrote: > > John Vincent <lusis....@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Bitching from the "operations" team that "devops" broke something. > >> Bitching from the "development" team that "devops" broke something.
> > If you created a "DevOps" team but kept separate "operations" and > > "development" teams... then you're doing it wrong. :-)
> > -Jan
>You've obviously never worked in a company with more than, say, 10 >people ;) I only partially kid. It's unrealistic and naive to think >that an existing company of any size can mash two teams up like that >at the drop of a hat. Let's not even consider the fact that the person >managing operations may be grossly unqualified to manage developers.
>But you're proving my point. The reason devops isn't a title, team or >department is that it doesn't just apply to devops. It's about >aligning ALL of IT with the business - not just development as agile >promised.
>What about someone who works at a company with NO development team? >Yes those places exist. Would you tell the guy who manages all of his >infra with puppet that he's not a "devops" because he's not >interacting with a development team? I would say he's more 'devops' >than most.
