4 ms·
The weight of managing depot wide upgrades are definitely not a factor in turning down customer facing services. In 10+ years doing low level libraries and infr
by bhawks 3y ago
The weight of managing depot wide upgrades are definitely not a factor in turning down customer facing services. In 10+ years doing low level libraries and infrastructure no one ever used my teams efforts as a reason to sunset an offering.
Although depot migrations are tedious, the burden of doing them for all but a subset of mothballed systems would not significantly changed my life.
- tylerhou 3y agoAlso, generally speaking, because the model is "library owner makes the LSCs," library consumers are happy to accept small/reasonable changes in API usage. Off the top of my head I can only think of one time when an internal library deprecation caused a huge ruckus: some front-end framework was deprecated which led to a huge push to rewrite many of Google's internal websites. When I left even BigTable, MapReduce and other services are still supported even though they have been deprecated and their replacements (Spanner, Flume) had been GA for more than a decade. (Although their API calls may just go through a translation layer, not sure.)