291–300 of 621 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Good lesson on making command prompts on machines always tell you exactly what machine you're working on.
I like to color code my terminal. Production systems are always red. Dev are blue/green. Staging is yellow.
This is painful to read. It's easy to say that they they should have tested their backups better, and so on, but there is another lesson here, one that's far more important and easily missed. When doing something really critical (such as playing with the master database late at night) ALWAYS work with a checklist. Write down WHAT you are going to do, and if possible, talk to a coworker about it so you can vocalize th…
Two points: 1) Patio11 touches on a very good lesson, in passing, in an article about Japanese business[1]: While raw programming ability might not be highly valued at many Japanese companies, and engineers are often not in positions of authority, there is nonetheless a commitment to excellence in the practice of engineering. I am an enormously better engineer for having had three years to learn under the more senior…
The googlable nugget is actually "organizational scar tissue" (it caught my attention too). It's from Jason Fried. On twitter:
https://twitter.com/jasonfried/status/2758624714
and also apparently in "Rework", quoted with more context here:
https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/1012423-policies-are-organi...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you get the chance to observe pilots operating in the cockpit, I'd recommend it. Every important procedure (even though the pilot has it memorized) is done with a checklist. Important actions are verbally announced and confirmed: "You have the controls" "I have the controls". Much of flight training deals with situational awareness and eliminating distractions in the cockpit. Crew Resource Management[1]. 1: https:…
There is a neat video[1] where a Swiss flight has to make an emergency landing and just happens to have a film crew in the cockpit. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rEf35NtlBLg
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm a bit curious here. Do you think that your issues with scalability and reliability have to do with your tech choice (I think it was Ruby on Rails)? Don't want to bash Rails, I'm just genuinely curious, since I come from a Rails background as well and have seen issues similar to yours in the past.
You can check out their codebase here: https://github.com/gitlabhq/gitlabhq Just looking at their gemfile is rather telling: a couple hundred gems. I've always felt that if you're going above 100, you should carefully consider how much your codebase is trying to achieve. They're probably at the point where they really want to think about splitting off of their monolith codebase and into microservices.
Not so long ago GitLab decided to move from using AWS Cloud to managing own hardware. I wonder if such situation could happen if they used managed Postgres with automatic backups. Most of us use Cloud because OP's is hard, and human related risks are too high.
That choice to go to bare metal was reversed: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-com/infrastructure/issues/727#note... https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:M2CRY7... (cache link until GL.com is back up.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Like you, I would like to add my 2 cent, which I hope will be taken positively, as I would like to see them provide healthy competition for GitHub for years to come. Since GitLab is so transparent about everything, from their marketing/sales/feature proposals/technical issues/etc., they make it glaringly obvious, from time to time, that they lack very fundamental core skills, to do things right/well. In my opinion, t…
> They really should focus on creating jobs that pays $200,000+ a year, regardless of living location For those who haven't been following along, Gitlab's compensation policy is pretty much intentionally designed to not pay people to live in SF. It's a somewhat reasonable strategy for an all remote company. But they seem to have some pretty ambitious plans that may not be compatible with operating a physical plant.
I would point you to some very ambitious feature proposals on their issue tracker, but I can't for obvious reasons. I think GitLab is at a cross roads and this setback might be the eye opener they need. Moving forward, they really need to re-evaluate how they develop and evolve GitLab. For both online and Enterprise.
This idea of releasing early and on the 22nd works very well for low hanging fruits problems, but not for the more ambitious plans they have. If they understood the complexity for some of the more ambitious plans, they would know they are looking at, at least a year of R&D to create an MVP.
I think it makes sense to keep doing the release on the 22nd, but they also need to start building out teams that can focus on solving more complex problems that can take months or possibly a year to see fruition. Git hosting has reached a point, where differentiating factors can be easily copied and duplicated, so you are going to need something more substantive, to set yourself apart from the rest. And this is where I think Microsoft may have the upper hand in the future.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Like you, I would like to add my 2 cent, which I hope will be taken positively, as I would like to see them provide healthy competition for GitHub for years to come. Since GitLab is so transparent about everything, from their marketing/sales/feature proposals/technical issues/etc., they make it glaringly obvious, from time to time, that they lack very fundamental core skills, to do things right/well. In my opinion, t…
> They really should focus on creating jobs that pays $200,000+ a year, regardless of living location, to attract the best talent from around the world. Getting 3-6 top talent, that can help steer the company in the right direction, can make all the difference in the long run. SIGN ME UP! That would be a freaking great opportunity!!
I think you asking for the job, might be a signal, that you are not who they are looking for :-)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm a bit curious here. Do you think that your issues with scalability and reliability have to do with your tech choice (I think it was Ruby on Rails)? Don't want to bash Rails, I'm just genuinely curious, since I come from a Rails background as well and have seen issues similar to yours in the past.
LOL. GitHub is also a RoR shop.
Not everyone can afford that.