3 ms·
Agreed but that is not what is happening though ; people do both; they use legos and reinvent the wheel. Making everything, imho, worse. The authentication thi
by tluyben2 6y ago
Agreed but that is not what is happening though ; people do both; they use legos and reinvent the wheel. Making everything, imho, worse.
The authentication thingy you got as lego block did not quite fit and now you are using more code than the module has in it to add what you need for it to do, making the original module probably impossible to upgrade without a lot of work and creating a problem for maintenance. Now you can fix this by telling your client; ok, I won’t do this because your idea of auth is wrong. But then the client might kick me out (probably not a bad plan if they are doing trivial things significantly different than the rest of the world). I can just implement it like I mentioned above and make money maintaining it (risking having also to maintain the original lib). Or I can just make a new lib and for which I know it does what it was.
Then, my favourite option, is just take something that just works already, deploy that and adapt a few people their habits around it. It fits 95%, stop whining. The least popular option ofcourse, so there we are, creating slightly different wheels with millions of almost the same LoC and unused andor unmanaged libs that should not have been written or used, again, imho.
- kennu 6y agoI have different experiences. My "lego blocks" are AWS services. Each service is a black box that maintains its API backwards compatible forever. My custom stuff is built around the API and keeps working forever. ( * ) In my view AWS has been very successful in maintaining this backwards compatible model even when they often add new features to services. There are sometimes edge cases that are not possible to implement, but they are rarer and rarer as the service portfolio grows. In those cases the only option is to write your own container and deal with the usual package-level dependency issues in whatever programming language you use. ( * ) The only thing that doesn't work forever is Node.js, which is deprecated every few years and needs to be upgraded to a new major version. I'm looking forward to the possibility of WebAssembly/Deno replacing Node.js as an "evergreen" application platform.
- tluyben2 6y agoWhat are you paying though? The most common reason I get pulled in is because of exorbitant aws bills which eclipse dev bills... This sound expensive.
- kennu 6y agoIn the past 5 years all my projects have been based on AWS Lambda, API Gateway, S3, DynamoDB and other serverless technologies which are only billed for actual usage and network traffic. So they don't cost much unless they actually get heavy load from users.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- altdatathrow 6y agoI love how the justification of numerous AWS services is always "so it can scale" but if and when that scale ever happens, a new architecture is necessary because the costs become untenable.
- kennu 6y agoI haven't seen this happen myself. In projects that I've been involved with, the justification of using serverless services has been to reduce development costs, because you don't have to setup and develop everything from scratch and spend effort maintaining the infrastructure. The ultimate goal is to avoid doing anything else than define the business logic that is unique to the project.