(I work at Oxide and helped review this RFD.) There are always pros and cons to the choice to use something that already exists before making something new. Ul

(I work at Oxide and helped review this RFD.) There are always pros and cons to the choice to use something that already exists before making something new. Ultimately, it is our job as engineers to take a look at the tradeoffs and make the call. I would agree that Oxide has taken the "so we should build it" choice more than other places I have ever worked. However, Oxide is a bigger swing than many of the places I have worked. And we have higher intentions of excellence than many places I have worked. I think both of these factors make it more likely to want to build your own thing: it is less often that something off the shelf does exactly what we need, and it is easier to provide something great if you have the ability to take control of it. Furthermore, there's also some amount of bias in the stuff you hear about: people love to hear stories about some new shiny thing, but they don't want to hear about very meat and potatoes boring choices. So you're going to see the story on HN about us making a query language, but you're not going to hear the story about us using TypeScript on our frontend rather than say, some Rust + wasm thing, or about us choosing CockroachDB for the data plane. Until circumstances change and suddenly the Cockroach choice becomes interesting, which it did! So it's worth keeping that in mind as well. Time will tell, but I can't think of an obvious place yet where we made the choice to build our own something and it clearly was the wrong decision in retrospect. And it has very often been clearly the right decision in retrospect. That's my own personal metric for "are we making good decisions over time?"