I tend to think this is an issue with 'designing' systems vs 'evolving' them. When you build something to 'scratch your own itch' and it suddenly becomes popular, lots of stuff you didn't think of tends to pop up. Maybe all the market studies, focus groups, ad nauseum in 'traditional' BigCo development actually did have some value.
Ansible at least had the advantage of being a 'broad' tool from the get go. So a lot of the common use cases were covered. But I'm sure surprises still popped up :-)
Re:Ansible 4.0
by overtomanu on Thursday May 20, 2021 @10:10AM
(#27221285)
Can you give some examples of breaking changes in spring boot? Thinking of using it for some projects
I do not think it is a case of hindsight 20/20. These are basic things like object need multiple fields but it is rigidly defined with 2 fixed strings and now one need object V2 to update. Or all functionality dumped at base URL so no scope of adding sub-functionality without breaking the whole pattern. I can understand no one can plan for how complex functionality evolve over time. But here I see perennial amateur hour with every release. And it is doubly irritating when these frameworks are already many layer deep stack of bullshit abstractions so ideally they should be able to handle changes without breaking.