Re:Infrastructure as Code, Not Infrastructure as Files
by _frkl on Thursday October 17, 2019 @02:23AM
(#21279414)
Interesting approach. In general, I always prefer 'Infrastructure as files' as the article calls it. I think if that's not possible in any specific scenario then we just didn't create the right abstractions yet. In the devops space I think we're still a far way off, so tools like the one mentioned in the article can help us get there. But I would not think they should be the ' user interface', so to say. That should be a data structure of some sort, ideally as small as possible, typed and validatable.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Infrastructure as Code, Not Infrastructure as Files
by mv1 on Thursday October 17, 2019 @11:29AM
(#21283095)
I think the problem is that building any new abstractions is a pretty big lift today, and so innovation is slow moving. Something like this can make that innovation easier, eventually giving way to some simple YAML files.
Unfortunately, it seems like every app eventually has its own pet requirements as it matures, meaning that building new abstractions might be important as part of the UI.
But generally, I agree, tools like this are needed because existing abstractions aren't good enough. I'm just not sure they will ever be good enough when everyone has custom requirements and app-specific architectures.