4 ms·
A lot of internal teams don't use the AWS software for various reasons. So like, CodePipeline might be great, but there's an internal analogue (I'm not sure the
by dimmke 4y ago
A lot of internal teams don't use the AWS software for various reasons. So like, CodePipeline might be great, but there's an internal analogue (I'm not sure the detail I can go into here) that is awful that a lot of teams use. There's been an internal movement to try to get all teams onto AWS services, but it's incredibly slow moving and there's no timeline that I know of.
- fdgsdfogijq 4y ago
- CharlieDigital 4y ago> So like, CodePipeline might be great The entire CodeBuild suite kind of sucks when you stack it up to options available on the market including GitHub Actions, GitLab Runners, Azure DevOps, literally almost anything. If the internal analogue is worse than the CodeStar suite, then yikes.
- banana-19 4y agoCodestar is simpler than and has too many feature gaps compared to the internal offerings, which makes building and deploying Amazon scale multi-tier, multi-environment services difficult.
- bb88 4y agoClearly a mistake. They should be dogfooding their offerings. A lot of tooling will probably just be better if they can host it on AWS.
- paulclinger 4y agoMaybe they are dogfooding their future offerings, hence the experience.
- yazaddaruvala 4y agoOh man, we disagree! I miss Pipelines (the internal version of CodePipeline). Having worked at startups and now at Google, that tool is honestly best in class. FWIW, I don't miss Quilt, or VersionSets, or Apollo, or Hydra, or TOD, or NAWS Pipelines bridge. But Pipelines itself, brining all of those tools together is amazing!
- dimmke 4y agoI was referring to Apollo specifically, since we're naming things.
- femto113 4y agoI was once pitched a startup by some Amazon vets whose elevator pitch was "Apollo for everyone". I literally laughed out loud, which was followed by some very awkward assurances from them that they were not, in fact, trying to be funny.