DevOps Didn't Fail – We Just Gave It the Tools It Deserved

From the article:

> One of the enduring, almost comical truths of DevOps is this: Developers often think DevOps is too Ops-centric. Ops folks think DevOps is too Dev-centric. Both sides are convinced the other one got the better end of the deal. You know what that usually means? It’s probably a decent deal. Nobody got everything they wanted, which is often the only way progress happens.

This is evidence that DevOps failed: the fact that there are Dev folk and Ops folk.

It's a scenario where Platform folk are given the incentive to not allow DevOps principles to succeed, as they would be working themselves out of relevance and even out of a job.

I sadly have worked in such a place where this was rather obvious. The DevOps guys made it their point to move every single bit of infrastructure provisioning onto their own custom templates and scripts even if that is used once throughout the whole org, require Dev folk to only touch provisioning through their custom templates, and sit on infrastructure PRs for weeks under the excuse they don't have time to review them because too many external teams want to touch their templates.

The platform team ended up building a moat to protect their job security, placed the DevOps flag over it, and everyone suffers.

Unless you have a single team responsible for their whole operation, DevOps won't succeed. The incentives are not there.