6 ms·
I thought that was the point of the article, right? That the tech benefits may not be there, but they’re using it for the non-tech benefits
by Esophagus4 3mo ago
I thought that was the point of the article, right?
That the tech benefits may not be there, but they’re using it for the non-tech benefits
- clickety_clack 3mo agoFrom the article: > My personal threshold would be the moment the CTO isn't the only engineer anymore. As soon as a second person shows up, the problems K8s solves become real.
- darkwater 3mo agoWhat a world we live in with people thinking that the problems of a 2 (founder) engineers startup deserve k8s complexity... Even with LLMs, they are going to rack up tech debt if their focus is - as it should in as mall startup - the final product and not the tech stack itself.
- Esophagus4 3mo ago> Even with LLMs, they are going to rack up tech debt And if they don’t?
- darkwater 3mo agoWell, congrats then, I guess.
- mijoharas 3mo ago> That the tech benefits may not be there, but they’re using it for the non-tech benefits My read of the article is that this is correct, but that the benefits they're using it for are the operational, and organisational. I think the comment you're replying to is arguing that those benefits don't really matter or outweigh the additional complexity costs when N=2 (engineers). I think I'd probably agree.
- Esophagus4 3mo agoI think I still disagree. If K8s is new to you, sure. Definitely not the time to learn it. But I can see a world where it’s fine to use early on. Especially if your team is cloud native. K8s isn’t really a new controversial toy in my eyes, it’s pretty well supported and good enough for most things out of the box. I just don’t think it’s as big a deal as the “CTO IS WASTING EVERYONES TIME” argument.