That Nikolay was hired for this does not come across in the article. If this is true, my criticism is even more prescient, as it was merely in the writing of t

That Nikolay was hired for this does not come across in the article. If this is true, my criticism is even more prescient, as it was merely in the writing of the article where this could have been corrected. It sounds like gitlab already did the thing I recommended, they just didn't highlight it properly. This isn't directed at you, but HN does not take criticism or alternate viewpoints well. The article is great on many levels. I gave feedback on how they could improve, the real damage is done when someone doesn't care enough to comment. The conclusion section is lacking in meta analysis and why gitlab. Given the LoE that went into this, gitlab missed an opportunity here. If I were the senior manager on this project, I would want a retrospective on why this was hit in the first place and not as a form of someone to blame, but what about the design, the technology selection, the monitoring, testing, etc. contributed to the outcome we saw.