4 ms·
This type of infra only makes sense when you have Scaling People Problems to solve using technical solutions. Say you're MSFT and you need to let thousands of p
by AYBABTME 3y ago
This type of infra only makes sense when you have Scaling People Problems to solve using technical solutions. Say you're MSFT and you need to let thousands of people of various skillset and skill levels, ship locally useful software at decent velocity, but while preserving important cross-cutting stuff like TLS, telemetry, wtv. Or when dealing with legacy software.
But otherwise it's not required.
- tjoff 3y agoThe weird part is the hype around it, because that extends well beyond that particular scenario. Or maybe scale doesn't matter. Even if you replace thousands with tens you still often have a huge variety in skillset and focus.
- AYBABTME 3y agoThe hype is career development driven development.
- H8crilA 3y agoRule of thumb: if you cannot staff a team (even a small one) for a service - it cannot be a standalone service. This rule is sometimes a bit too aggressive, but only a bit - for example it doesn't apply to an off-the-shelf database.
- iamthepieman 3y agoDid you get this rule of thumb somewhere or make it up? If the latter, can you please share a source?
- H8crilA 3y agoI made it up myself, and I think it's a good rule.
- iamthepieman 3y agoI agree that it's a good rule. Of course the people responsible for staffing aren't usually the people building services.