There is no workflow definition. DavidS started a thread, but so far it has
only general principles, no work flow.
I for one struggle to “define a workflow” without using the vernacular of the
underlying tool (git + githug/gitlab/bitbucket). Best practices SW development
workflows, today, are inextricably tied to the tools used to implement them;
and the one common tool is git (I don’t believe anyone has or would suggest any
alternative).
There seem to be [quite] a few people here with devops experience, as users,
and a few as disciplined admins. I think it’s incumbent upon those of us with
that expertise and experience to come together and define a candidate workflow
and present it to the larger team.
But that also excludes all people from the conversation that don't speak
the language. At some point, the requirements must be expressed in a
way that communicates what it does to every person of every background.
This kind of tool-based thinking must also be constantly be monitored so
that it does not degenerate in a what-is-best-for-the-tool conversation
instead of a what-is best-for-end-user conversation. The latter
critical. Often people will sacrifice usability to make tool
integration easier. We cannot let that happen.
But I agree with you in part. The top level specification is like a
boat on the surface of the water and it does help to have a glass bottom
to see what is going on beneath. Those people with devops should
coordinate in another thread and make proposals for top-level functional
to the broader audience.
Greg
