Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

One of the great benefits of continuous deployment is that it really helps you hone in on a useful testing philosophy.

We've been doing continuous deployment at Ars for about 1.5 years. We would generally write tests for our apps before that, but they were somewhat directionless (and awfully easy to blow off for a "minor" change). Once our tests became crucial, we did a much better job of picking relevant tests and feeling their importance.

Many people visibly shudder when we tell them about our deploys. What they don't consider, though, is that manually ensuring a given release is "good" is less reliable than letting a well instructed computer system do it. When you make changes, run your tests, and then eyeball things to make sure everything's cool, you're really just doing unstructured integration testing. You're likely to miss regressions, unintentional bugs in seemingly unrelated systems, etc.



It's great to see the ideas like CI trickle into the that startup world at large, to the point where we have VC blogging about it.

The thing that's amazing to me is that anyone would choose to NOT work like this. If you are web-based startup and cannot do multiple deployments a day, or you don't empower ever last person on your technical team to do a production deploy, you are at a serious competitive dis-advantage.


There is a difference between CI and Continuous deployment. CI can just mean you continuously build/run tests/deploy to staging(may be). The article talks about continuous deployment to production.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: