[bionsystem]

Most devs can't do SRE, in fact the best devs I've met know they can't do SRE (and vice versa). If I may get a bit philosophical, SRE must be conservative by nature and I feel that devs are often innovative by nature. Another argument is that they simply focus on different problems. One sets up an IDE and clicks play, has some ephemeral devcontainer environment that "just works", and the hard part is to craft the software. The other has the software ready and sometimes very few instructions on how to run it, + your typical production issues, security, scaling, etc. The brain of each gets wired differently over time to solve those very different issues effectively.

[zinodaur]

I don’t understand this take - if all engineers go on call, they learn real quick what happens when their coworkers are too innovative. It is a good feedback loop that teaches them not to make unreliable software.

SREs are great when the problem is “the network is down” or “kubernetes won’t run my pods”, but expecting a random engineer to know all the failure modes of software they didn’t build and don’t have context on never seems to work out well.

[rincebrain]

It's possible to do both, you just need to be cognizant of what you're doing in both positions.

A tricky part becomes when you don't have both roles for something, like SRE-developed tools that are maintained by the ones writing them, and you need to strike the balance yourselves until/unless you wind up with that split. If you're not aware of both hats and juggling wearing them intentionally, in that case, you can wind up with tools out of SRE that are worse than any SWE-only tool might ever be, because the SREs sometimes think they won't make the same mistakes, but all the same feature-focused things apply for SRE-written tools too...