4 ms·
Given the prevalence of Kubernetes, I am not sure more abstractions are needed. Kubernetes if anything is too complete in how it manages it's deployments, and a
by InTheArena 6y ago
Given the prevalence of Kubernetes, I am not sure more abstractions are needed. Kubernetes if anything is too complete in how it manages it's deployments, and all this does is add another level of abstraction on top of that, while encouraging people not to think about the operational part of the loop. For example, no health or readiness checks are defined as part of the deployment examples in this link. If you are still running multi-deployment with Ansible/ Puppet / Cloud formation, etc I see value, but i think most are probably better off focusing on going K8s.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- ghayes 6y agoManaging Kubernetes configuration is a task unto itself. I'd say one of the best things that "deserves to be built" is a user-friendly layer that generates Kubernetes configuration that can start simple (e.g. total boilerplate) and be configured by hand as you have deeper requirements. Additionally, build-steps (e.g. how do your containers get built) etc can't be ignored. This all tallies up to me to about a day of engineering work to get a project setup with all the bells and whistles every time I want to start a new serious project on K8s. I definitely think Waypoint (or a similar product) could reduce this time to minutes, so long as I can customize more as the project evolves.
- darthrupert 6y agoAs a System Architect, I would never be responsible for starting the use of Kubernetes. So there's a clear market for replacing it.