3 ms·
Ignoring it completely is a viable strategy. A lot of 12 factor sounds like common sense to people who regularly ship stuff. For example, if I fail to put the c
by lopatin 3y ago
Ignoring it completely is a viable strategy. A lot of 12 factor sounds like common sense to people who regularly ship stuff. For example, if I fail to put the config in the environment, the risk that introduces will be immediately obvious in the PR and someone would be able to raise that concern, with real justification, not because it's declared in a 12 factor manifesto.
- i-use-nixos-btw 3y agoI think ignoring it completely is a viable strategy once you've already gone through the stages - when your mind is in the right place. I have moved on a long way from the days that 12 factor was my bible, but those days completely redefined my way of developing software. I'm not exaggerating here - it completely shifted my approach. I guess it's similar to Scrum in that way - it isn't a great end point, but if you're stuck in the old ways (i.e. the methods used before it was even a thing) then it's at least a good approach to sink your teeth into, try it out, shape your approach, and move on from there. Basically, I'd rather see a replacement that improves on 12 factor than throwing out the book entirely.
- ascendantlogic 3y ago> A lot of 12 factor sounds like common sense to people who regularly ship stuff. In 2023, yes. A lot of the 12 factor methodologies became table stakes in the modern cloud era. Back when this was written "cloud" was not nearly as ubiquitous as it is now, although we were certainly headed in that direction. A lot of the comments here are viewing this through a 2023 lens and forgetting it was written in 2011.