Continuous Integration vs. Continuous Delivery vs. Continuous Deployment

Question

What\'s the difference between these three terms? My university provides the following definitions:

Continuous Integration basically just means that

Answer 1

I think we're over analyzing and maybe complicating a bit the "continuous" suite of words. In this context continuous means automation. For the other words attached to "continuous" use the English language as your translation guide and please don't try to complicate things! In "continuous build" we automatically build (write/compile/link/etc) our application into something that's executable for a specific platform/container/runtime/etc. "Continuous integration" means that your new functionality tests and performs as intended when interacting with another entity. Obviously, before integration takes place, the build must happen and thorough testing would also be used to validate the integration. So, in "continuous integration" one uses automation to add value to an existing bucket of functionality in a way that doesn't negatively disrupt the existing functionality but rather integrates nicely with it, adding a perceived value to the whole. Integration implies, by its mere English definition, that things jive harmoniously so in code-talk my add compiles, links, tests and runs perfectly within the whole. You wouldn't call something integrated if it failed the end product, would you?! In our context "Continuous deployment" is synonymous with "continuos delivery" since at the end of the day we've provided functionality to our customers. However, by over analyzing this, I could argue that deploy is a subset of delivery because deploying something doesn't necessarily mean that we delivered. We deployed the code but because we haven't effectively communicated to our stakeholders, we failed to deliver from a business perspective! We deployed the troops but we haven't delivered the promised water and food to the nearby town. What if I were to add the "continuous transition" term, would it have its own merit? After all, maybe it's better suited to describe the movement of code through environments since it has the connotation of "from/to" more so than deployment or delivery which could imply one location only, in perpetuity! This is what we get if we don't apply common sense.

In conclusion, this is simple stuff to describe (doing it is a bit more ...complicated!), just use common sense, the English language and you'll be fine.