Comments by "" (@retagainez) on "Git Flow is Bad | Prime Reacts" video.

  1. I agree. Prime definitely missed something. I would revisit his distinction between the two: CI is about "making sure your code is always working," and CD is about "making sure your code is always releasable." CD includes CI.
    4
  2. He probably omits PRs because he thinks pair programming is a better way to do code reviews (it might not work with open source), but it doesn't make any difference. If you find PRs prevent you from using this methodology, it probably points to an issue with the code review, not everything else. For your last question, it takes a lot of trust in your team; believe they will code using BDD/TDD and run unit tests before pushing. It is far faster to run something locally than remotely regarding unit tests. If your tests fail at integration (your integration tests), your unit tests are insufficient. Your design needs to be simplified, and you need to break it apart or have better interfaces with well-defined ways to speak to other components. The same needs to be considered for unit tests that run far too long. Suppose your unit testing is too simplistic to detect issues between things you might think are "external components" external to the module you worked on. In that case, your code needs better interfaces between the two systems. As for the rest of your questions, MANY resources cover these topics as the result of decades worth of software development. The XP book is an example of this, written decades ago. I tried to consider your question and any other questions you might have in this explanation. If something needs clarification, I will try to explain it my best. This is my understanding from looking at Dave Farley's videos on CD for the past two years and reading his CD book (although I admit I need to re-read it sometime soon.)
    4
  3. I totally agree with this. It is VERY easy to debate with him just from viewing this singular video, without any other context on what CI/CD is. It would help a lot of others who are confused to view his other videos, especially where he cites real-life businesses of various sizes with measurable success using CI/CD.
    3
  4. The Google mono repo goes against what you're saying about this may only apply to small products. He directly states in the video that CI does NOT only apply to web apps, as Vincent mistakenly mentioned in his post.
    2
  5. Agreed. The other context is needed for prime. I thought I was stupid when I tried to dive into his videos two years ago! No... it just requires an open mind I think.
    2
  6.  @hm5236  You're right
    2
  7. But what's the context of his quote? That matters a lot. He could EASILY be talking about his Java coding case study, where they might write production code before writing a unit test while doing TDD... As far as I know, CI/CD is a methodology for merging/delivering. Not strict rules, but guidelines perse.
    1
  8.  @taliosnz  You still don't need a PR to help define a better contract that integrates with the code from another team. This can be done with pair programming still. If you work with the other team a lot, you may need to integrate more members between the two groups to get a wider breadth of knowledge. I'm not sure of my last statement, but I think it's more of an issue with team structure rather than code review structure.
    1
  9. CI is included as part of CD...
    1