DEV Community

Discussion on: Let's stop fooling ourselves. What we call CI/CD is actually only CI.

Collapse
 
webbureaucrat profile image
webbureaucrat • Edited

Most organizations we work with say: "of course we have CI/CD pipelines!"
But when one digs deeper - there's usually some CI - and no CD in sight. Or, as @itaysk noted "it's not even CI, but continuous build..."

This is a good article, but I'm a little confused by this central claim. It seems surprising that someone would claim to have a CI/CD pipeline if they only have CI. It seems like a difficult mistake to make, like if I said that I basically have a car when I actually just have a bicycle. They're very different things.

Could you perhaps elaborate on what you consider to be CD that other organizations don't recognize? Or could you give an example of something that someone thought was CI/CD that wasn't?

Collapse
 
antweiss profile image
Ant(on) Weiss • Edited

My main idea is that we tend to conflate CI with CD. Folks start with CI naively believing that with time - as they build it out - the same pipeline will take them to CD land. But then they hit the wall of uncertainty and stop the pipeline at the "staging" environment. So when you ask them, they say "we have CD, but we're not deploying to production because reasons" - and that's denial of course.

Collapse
 
webbureaucrat profile image
webbureaucrat

This makes sense, thanks!