- SlimFast Diet Review: Does It Work for Weight Loss?
- 5 Best Golf Courses in Miami, FL
- 7 Highly Converting Company Profile Examples to Inspire You and Tips to Create a Great One – weMail
- Status (SNT) Price, Chart, Value & Market Cap | CoinCodex
- She Has a Plan for Pier A, and Relieving The Battery’s ‘Incredible Burden’ | Tribeca Trib Online
Too many tools, too many issues
The financial company was looking to move toward cloud computing and embrace open source. While the development teams worked on various tools, it became apparent that using multiple tools was too complicated to accomplish their open source goals. “Within our organization, if you have a team who wants to see some other team’s code, they have to go through a different set of processes,” said Ravi, engineering manager at the financial organization. “You have to get permissions in order to even see the code and there’s no true collaborative experience. That was one big problem.”
Moving back and forth between tools was an issue in both being able to communicate and also a hindrance in the daily grind. Not all the tools that were being used by the development team were automated, which meant that integration took extra steps. “Other git-derived tools, whether open source or not, are a lot of manual work. Which as the scale grows, work keeps growing alongside,” said Michael, software engineer. “It was becoming a burden, especially for me living in a DevOps world, to keep doing manual stuff and not evaluate all the tools that might make a lot of those steps more automated and easier to manage.”
Other CI tools that the team had been working with used a disorganized array of plugins. “The real challenge we had with Jenkins was that every team was spinning up their own version of Jenkins. We had like 40, 50 different instances of Jenkins running all over the place with different versions, different kinds of plugins,” Ravi said. “Nobody was keeping track of what plugins are running on what and what software was running where.”
Cost was another factor in the development team’s decision to pare down their tooling. As the company experienced, it can be expensive to keep a variety of tool services running.