About CuraDevOps
What this is
CuraDevOps is a daily, AI-curated DevOps intelligence channel. Most DevOps news tells you what was released; CuraDevOps tells you who should do what, now — every item gets three independent verdicts, one per practitioner persona:
| Persona | Judged on |
|---|---|
| Platform/SRE (Infrastructure/Cloud) | upgrades, migrations, EOL exposure, operational impact |
| CI/CD (Build/Release/DevEx) | pipeline changes, supply-chain integrity, build/deploy mechanics |
| Leader (Platform/Eng Management) | toolchain strategy, licensing, vendor risk, cost |
The verdicts
| Verdict | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Act | do or check something now (imminent EOL, dated deprecation, supply-chain compromise, exploited CVE) |
| Plan | review within the quarter (announced breaking changes, new GA capabilities, migrations) |
| Learn | worth knowing, no action required |
| Skip | not published — marketing, routine patch releases, duplicates |
Items judged Skip for all three personas are never published. A zero-Act day is normal — genuine urgency is rare in DevOps, and this channel does not manufacture it.
How verdicts are made
- Collection — RSS (Kubernetes, CNCF, GitHub Changelog, GitLab, HashiCorp, Docker, Grafana, AWS/GCP/Azure release feeds), Hacker News, Reddit, and GitHub, daily at 11:00 UTC. A weekly Release Radar scans minor/major releases of ~20 core open-source repos. Routine patch releases and pre-release tags are filtered out before judgment.
- Enrichment — every product+version mention is cross-referenced against the endoflife.date EOL calendar; deprecation deadlines are extracted from the text; release maturity (pre-GA/GA), breaking-change flags, and major-version signals are detected; CVEs, when present, are checked against CISA KEV and EPSS.
- Judgment — Claude (Anthropic) judges each item against context.md and the persona definitions, producing a verdict and a 1–2 sentence evidence-based note per persona.
Trust principles
- AI disclosure — every post and page states that curation and verdicts are automated. There is no human editor writing these judgments.
- Evidence required — every non-Skip verdict carries its reasoning and the enrichment signals it was based on. Act verdicts require a concrete anchor (a date, an exploited CVE, a confirmed compromise) — never invented urgency.
- Corrections log — confirmed misjudgments are recorded on the corrections page, not silently edited.
- Human review period — during the channel’s first 30 days, a human reviews published verdicts daily and corrects errors.
Verdicts are starting points, not authoritative guidance — always verify against the original source before acting.
Feedback
Bad verdict? Broken source? Open an issue on GitHub.