[Klug-general] Live and Dev enviroments

[David Halliday]

I'm (in one of my roles) a build manager and Mike is correct. However much
management scream and jump around wanting something live yesterday. Testing
provides protection from embarrassment.

I'm not saying that we always do this properly BUT the more we (the systems
and deployments team) have been refusing to send things prematurely live the
fewer embarrassing mistakes have been made.

Release management roles like information security roles are vital to a
company running professionally. You aren't going to receive thanks very
often because most of the world only notices you doing your job when your
job is to hold up progress to make sure things are done properly.

On 26 November 2010 11:07, Mike Evans <mike at tandem.f9.co.uk> wrote:

>
>
> On 26/11/10 10:32, Dan Attwood wrote:
>
>>
>> I was wondering if any one had any tips or tricks on how they set up
>> their environment to avoid this kind of problem.
>>
>>  In the environments I've worked at developers - even senior ones - had no
> access rights from their machines to anything running in the live
> environment.  Deployment to the live and pre-production environments was
> always through some sort of package management/deployment script.  That
> meant that the Test environment was used to test the actual functionality,
> the pre-production environment was used to test the package was deployable,
> and for final User Acceptance Testing and then the change was made to
> production using the same deployment mechanism as to pre-prod.  To run the
> deployment mechanism you should have a different user - even if it's you
> with a different hat on, different password etc.
>
> Mike
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Kent mailing list
> Kent at mailman.lug.org.uk
> https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/kent
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.lug.org.uk/pipermail/kent/attachments/20101126/40ce2175/attachment.htm>