5 ms·

I actually find zipping and uploading manually a PITA. Started using the Serverless framework [1] recently and now I just run `serverless deploy --stage dev --a

I actually find zipping and uploading manually a PITA. Started using the Serverless framework [1] recently and now I just run `serverless deploy --stage dev --aws-profile profilename` from my repo (which is an npm script). [1]https://serverless.com/ https://serverless.com/

moondev 9y ago
No doubt! It seems antiquated and repetitive
- dasil003 9y ago
  Well that's what CI/CD is for. It's not any different than building and pushing a new docker image.
  - fapjacks 9y ago
    I keep hearing responses like this about various aspects of serverless, but it makes no sense. If a lot of these serverless operations are "not any different" than various Docker operations, why should I be spending time and money to couple my application to AWS Lambda versus simply running the container myself? Why shouldn't I just deploy a container (pod) for my code if I'm already running kubernetes? The more I hear people defending serverless, the more it feels like they're asking people to voluntarily increase their time and money costs, learn hyperspecialized and nontransferable skills, and make their application far less adaptable. All of this while accruing tons of technical debt for a pittance of some convenience.
    - dasil003 9y ago
      To be clear, I'm not a proponent of serverless at all. I'm just pointing out in isolation that zipping and shipping something is not antiquated, it's just a methodology for shipping code. I guess it feels old because it's not wrapped up in a lickable CLI and online docs with great typography, but it's not fundamentally flawed. To your point, I don't see any value of serverless over containers today. We are now at a point where container orchestration is mature enough that it's a sane default choice, but it took a while to get here. Serverless is where containers were 5-7 years ago (depending how you squint). Will serverless ever be a credible replacement for containers? That depends on the vendors working out a whole lot of details. In theory, with the right services around it, serverless can be lighter than containers because they can fully control the baseline environment and build more into it, but that is also less flexible than containers. How much standardization will be possible between vendors? If the price comes down and the tradeoffs look good enough then I could see it eating into container marketshare, but I'm really not holding my breath. It's still 100% in the hype phase.
- mitchty 9y ago
  It reminds me of WAR files with IBM websphere to be honest.
finaliteration 9y ago
It’s not quite as bad if you use .NET Core (which is what I’m currently using for a number of things in an integration stack). I just have to run “dotnet lambda deploy-function” with a template set up. I started with Golang, however, and found the “out of the box” deployment process pretty painful which is part of why I switched to .NET Core.
marcc 9y ago
Uploading manually is a PITA. That’s because you really should automate it using CI/CD if it’s not your local dev environment. If you are manually uploading your code for a dev environment it would be worth exploring a better local, offline framework to avoid this. Don’t upload manually.
repsilat 9y ago
Why would you do it manually? Write a two-line script to do it. Downloading a framework to run an npm script that does the equivalent of running `zip` followed by `scp` (or `aws s3 cp` or whatever) seems crazy to me.
- alexcroox 9y ago
  The framework handles the setup and management of versions and resources for me. Uploading is a small but relevant part of it.
paulgb 9y ago
Another cool thing about Serverless is it can deploy a Python WSGI app (e.g. a Flask app) with little change in the code. It simplifies local testing and makes it easier to leave Lambda and move to dedicated hosting if I ever decide to.
Blackstone4 9y ago
When they do it for you it's awesome isn't it. I've been using Apex Up. It handles API Gateway config, the zip upload, SSL certs and deployment to AWS Lambda

moondev 9y ago

No doubt! It seems antiquated and repetitive

dasil003 9y ago
Well that's what CI/CD is for. It's not any different than building and pushing a new docker image.
- fapjacks 9y ago
  I keep hearing responses like this about various aspects of serverless, but it makes no sense. If a lot of these serverless operations are "not any different" than various Docker operations, why should I be spending time and money to couple my application to AWS Lambda versus simply running the container myself? Why shouldn't I just deploy a container (pod) for my code if I'm already running kubernetes? The more I hear people defending serverless, the more it feels like they're asking people to voluntarily increase their time and money costs, learn hyperspecialized and nontransferable skills, and make their application far less adaptable. All of this while accruing tons of technical debt for a pittance of some convenience.
  - dasil003 9y ago
    To be clear, I'm not a proponent of serverless at all. I'm just pointing out in isolation that zipping and shipping something is not antiquated, it's just a methodology for shipping code. I guess it feels old because it's not wrapped up in a lickable CLI and online docs with great typography, but it's not fundamentally flawed. To your point, I don't see any value of serverless over containers today. We are now at a point where container orchestration is mature enough that it's a sane default choice, but it took a while to get here. Serverless is where containers were 5-7 years ago (depending how you squint). Will serverless ever be a credible replacement for containers? That depends on the vendors working out a whole lot of details. In theory, with the right services around it, serverless can be lighter than containers because they can fully control the baseline environment and build more into it, but that is also less flexible than containers. How much standardization will be possible between vendors? If the price comes down and the tradeoffs look good enough then I could see it eating into container marketshare, but I'm really not holding my breath. It's still 100% in the hype phase.
mitchty 9y ago
It reminds me of WAR files with IBM websphere to be honest.

finaliteration 9y ago

It’s not quite as bad if you use .NET Core (which is what I’m currently using for a number of things in an integration stack). I just have to run “dotnet lambda deploy-function” with a template set up. I started with Golang, however, and found the “out of the box” deployment process pretty painful which is part of why I switched to .NET Core.

marcc 9y ago

Uploading manually is a PITA. That’s because you really should automate it using CI/CD if it’s not your local dev environment. If you are manually uploading your code for a dev environment it would be worth exploring a better local, offline framework to avoid this. Don’t upload manually.

repsilat 9y ago

Why would you do it manually? Write a two-line script to do it. Downloading a framework to run an npm script that does the equivalent of running `zip` followed by `scp` (or `aws s3 cp` or whatever) seems crazy to me.

alexcroox 9y ago
The framework handles the setup and management of versions and resources for me. Uploading is a small but relevant part of it.

paulgb 9y ago

Another cool thing about Serverless is it can deploy a Python WSGI app (e.g. a Flask app) with little change in the code. It simplifies local testing and makes it easier to leave Lambda and move to dedicated hosting if I ever decide to.

Blackstone4 9y ago

When they do it for you it's awesome isn't it. I've been using Apex Up. It handles API Gateway config, the zip upload, SSL certs and deployment to AWS Lambda