> every team, composed only by SWE, is responsible for the whole code lifecycle, from inception to deployment to maintenance to decommission
I think this is the original thesis for DevOps.
I think this is the original thesis for DevOps.
It wasn't supposed to mean no more division of labor. Division of labor is a key innovation in human society that enables civilizations to exist. It was supposed to mean the teams in different categories of labor interact throughout and consider each other's needs, and not throw shit at each other over a wall and only ever interact through a ticketing system.
This waffly "breaking down the silos" stuff is a later redefinition, i believe reacting to the fact that the original meaning was extremely unpalatable to existing organisations, with existing employees and hierarchies who would be severely disrupted by it.
From Patrick Debois in the interview "Later, I saw a talk by Jean-Paul Sergent about developer (Dev) teams and operations (Ops) teams working together."
So no, breaking down the silos was baked in from the beginning.
The team that writes the code should also deploy the code and get paged in if there are problems in production.
That creates a tight feedback loop that requires developers to learn and manage the whole stack, code defensively, and test enough to be confident to deploy to production.
Didn't test your code enough? You will be paged in the middle of the night to fix it. It creates a strong incentive to make good decisions because you will be living in the mess you create.
I have heard of companies deciding to do 'devops' and it turns into a free for all of dev teams having to handle/build things end to end. Everyone loses in that scenario.