4 ms·

A response someone wrote to this article: https://medium.com/productboard-engineering/countering-microservice-disasters-5a8f957803cb https://medium.com/productb

• seibelj 5y ago
  > Three languages > ”At the heart of our Engineering Strategy is a rather simple document. A manifesto if you’d like. We call it Core Engineering Principles.” > Lists 7 fairly complex rules > ”There are about 30 more touching stacks, architecture, and org structure.” I’m dying. This could only be written with a straight face by a microservices enthusiast.
  • zizee 5y ago
    I read the full post linked to by the grand-parent, and I think you are mischaracterizing things. Settling on 3 programming languages is a good compromise between "one language to rule them all", and "anything goes". Being limited a single language's talent pool can be quite limiting, as is only having one language to problems in. Having no limits on language choice also has obvious drawbacks. The "7 fairly complex rules" are not _that_ complex considering they are rules for trying to tame a domain that is inherently complex. If you try and scale any software engineering team much beyond 30 engineers you will need to have similar rules regardless of whether you have a majestic monolith, microservices, or some mix of the two.