If it's that bad, you might be better off paying extra to avoid shitty outsourcing companies.

But you're probably not the person I should telling this, developers aren't usually in charge of that.

Who mentioned outsourcing?

> Who mentioned outsourcing?

lijok wrote:

When we get consultants in to speedboat a new system, we give them their own separate service. Saves a lot of time and de-risks our beautiful monolith.

You wont know how bad the product produced by consultants will be until it already had effect.

And on pricing specifically, both shitty and good consultancies charge about the same. The ones that charge well below market are an outlier that will guarantee bad product - those are to be avoided.

Micro services don’t solve any of those either.

What specifically do they not solve? Because in this thread we're, very specifically, discussing isolating the well maintained monolith from risky product produced by consultants, which microservices absolutely do solve.

I think the hot trend these days is to bash on microservices. I hear that a lot here, random blogs, youtube videos by self proclaimed top guns.

If hacker news is correct, microservices is the #1 worst idea of software engineering.

And whoever promotes them is either a kid with no experience or a complete moron.

Well, speaking for myself, I was against them from the start. Maybe the rejection of distributed objects (when it came) was a hot trend also but it didn't make it wrong.

Any of the problem above.

If you have a problem with bad consultants then solve that. Trying to solve it by jumping into microservices you will just have bad consultants writing your microservices equally badly, or even worse.

Yep and people you do not trust should not have access to CI/CD workflows and repo settings. Your CI/CD workflows should prevent everything else you mentioned.