5 ms·

>be used by those teams who want to move as much as possible to AWS By teams that have been mandated to move as much as possible to AWS by their company's seni

>be used by those teams who want to move as much as possible to AWS By teams that have been mandated to move as much as possible to AWS by their company's senior leadership, because it simplified accounts/they negotiated a "great contract" etc.

hocuspocus 2y ago
Funnily enough when my infra team talked to AWS solution architects about this topic, it seems they were very upfront: don't touch CodeCommit, AWS/Amazon teams mostly use GitLab internally. And we do have a partnership plus discounts conditional to minimum usage volumes.
- deeebug 2y ago
  Slight correction, the sales org uses GitLab, mainly to segregate any “code” they build for customers. Internal AWS/Amazon teams use an internal git-backed UI.
  - outime 2y ago
    The fact that there was no dogfooding in many years here tells everything one needs to know about CodeCommit.
    - latentsea 2y ago
      AWS CantCommit
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - neongodzilla 2y ago
      If AWS forced their teams to "dogfood", it would quickly morph into the Testuo blob monster from Akira -- there are too many products/services popping up too quickly, and the amount of time and knowledge lost to the constant changes would be catastrophic. Dogfooding is for simpler companies. It's also bullshit and best for product managers and sales. Let tech work with what's best for their specific internal environment.
- ctvo 2y ago
  The thing I like about AWS is they're very practical. Here's a project from AWS using the CDK to setup a CI/CD pipeline with Github actions: https://github.com/cdklabs/cdk-pipelines-github https://github.com/cdklabs/cdk-pipelines-github
grobbyy 2y ago
Having been on both sides, it often makes a lot of sense. A lot of companies have surprises requirements in contacts, such as HIPPA or military/classified or whatnot. The cost of adding a new vendor can be astronomical compared to the cost of dealing with CodeCommit. In truth, though, Amazon should have bought gitlab instead.
- benterix 2y ago
  > In truth, though, Amazon should have bought gitlab instead. We would be in very deep shit now.
g15jv2dp 2y ago
Software devs fall to hype sometimes. It's not just management. But I guess it's easier to always look for blame elsewhere.

hocuspocus 2y ago

Funnily enough when my infra team talked to AWS solution architects about this topic, it seems they were very upfront: don't touch CodeCommit, AWS/Amazon teams mostly use GitLab internally. And we do have a partnership plus discounts conditional to minimum usage volumes.

deeebug 2y ago
Slight correction, the sales org uses GitLab, mainly to segregate any “code” they build for customers. Internal AWS/Amazon teams use an internal git-backed UI.
- outime 2y ago
  The fact that there was no dogfooding in many years here tells everything one needs to know about CodeCommit.
  - latentsea 2y ago
    AWS CantCommit
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - neongodzilla 2y ago
    If AWS forced their teams to "dogfood", it would quickly morph into the Testuo blob monster from Akira -- there are too many products/services popping up too quickly, and the amount of time and knowledge lost to the constant changes would be catastrophic. Dogfooding is for simpler companies. It's also bullshit and best for product managers and sales. Let tech work with what's best for their specific internal environment.
ctvo 2y ago
The thing I like about AWS is they're very practical. Here's a project from AWS using the CDK to setup a CI/CD pipeline with Github actions: https://github.com/cdklabs/cdk-pipelines-github https://github.com/cdklabs/cdk-pipelines-github

grobbyy 2y ago

Having been on both sides, it often makes a lot of sense. A lot of companies have surprises requirements in contacts, such as HIPPA or military/classified or whatnot. The cost of adding a new vendor can be astronomical compared to the cost of dealing with CodeCommit. In truth, though, Amazon should have bought gitlab instead.

benterix 2y ago
> In truth, though, Amazon should have bought gitlab instead. We would be in very deep shit now.

g15jv2dp 2y ago

Software devs fall to hype sometimes. It's not just management. But I guess it's easier to always look for blame elsewhere.