this post was submitted on 09 Apr 2025
195 points (98.0% liked)
Programmer Humor
22752 readers
510 users here now
Welcome to Programmer Humor!
This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!
For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.
Rules
- Keep content in english
- No advertisements
- Posts must be related to programming or programmer topics
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Because my company works on archaic infrastructure, should PRs be as small as possible with sub-issues sorted into smaller PRs?
Small PR are easy to review and parse. Work gets broken down in to small, shippable changes. If you couple that with feature flags, you can get to a point where shipping a release is as easy as building whatever the latest commit is on Main and pushing it out the door.
Automate that, do it every week or two.
I completely agree, but every week or two is too long. At one point we had ours running builds + automated regression testing => release twice or more a day. Along with automatic change logs and monitoring, It was so nice. Tiny updates are always better to test and know exactly what/where/how a failure or positive change occurs when the cadence is that fast. The devs loved it, the QA loved it, and as a DevOps, I loved it. We were even able to do AB testing and rolling updates.
It only got worse when management changed hands and some people decided on going agile in a “Scrum-but” method and it’s been a drag that sprints are 3 weeks long. Now releases take longer, have larger impact for better or worse, and regression testing is much more complex and I have to be more involved in releasing new code. The faster cadence meant it happened so often it was fully automated and I didn’t even know when most went out unless I was watching a dashboard.
Mobile app users get annoyed if you push too many updates. So you gotta pace yourself.