Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Red Hat is pretty good at being Red Hat

redmonk.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 81 posts

Re: Red Hat is pretty good at being Red Hat

#61

Post by Godel_unicode »

harryf wrote: post #21
hinkley wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm starting to have doubts about this line of reasoning. It just doesn't explain enough of the risky behavior I see. I'm starting to think it might be the same thing that gets young developers to put up with 10+ hour days. That feeling you get when you lose yourself in a problem for hours and hours. Being in a Flow state is seductive. Nobody gets that feeling when looking through the bug database or knowledge base,…

Programming is based on hero worship. Anyone who makes even half an effort to better themselves as a software developer will encounter famous names from the past - those that "made a difference" by creating languages, operating systems and algorithms. Keyword here is "create". This is not an industry that celebrates maintence programmers. There's no glory for the guy that spent 20 years keeping the system that your b…

You think that Torvalds or K&R are famous because of their creation and not for the long-term maintenance of their projects? That's pretty shallow thinking in my opinion. Yes they created things that we use and love, but we use and love them because those creators took years of their lives and dedicated them to the maintenance (both technical and political) of their projects.

I for one admire them for their dedication and vision far more than for their creations and wish more programmers would try to be like them.

Re: Red Hat is pretty good at being Red Hat

#62

Post by shaklee3 »

smarterclayton wrote: post #28
breser wrote: post #5

OpenShift is a fork of Kubernetes. Case in point. OpenShift has functionality called a Route. That isn't in Kubernetes. Kubernetes of course went and added something similar called ingress. This means that anytime Kubernetes does a release that RedHat has to manage merging all those changes in with their local changes that aren't part of their project. This is exactly the same sort of thing that RedHat does with thei…

> The fact that RedHat has failed to get their modifications integrated upstream and have to maintain themselves is a massive failure on their part. Not really correct. We treated ingress as routes v2. Some of the design choices for ingress (which is still beta, and may change again before reaching stable) were improvements, but others created more problems. RBAC, most of the authentication code, a huge amount of per…

This is easily confirmed. Just look at the companies upstreaming into k8s, and you'll see redhat is dominating. They have people in almost all SIGs, and are very active in the community. Thanks for all the contributions.

Re: Red Hat is pretty good at being Red Hat

#63

Post by watwut »

hinkley wrote: post #13
watwut wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The burning desire to build from scratch is simply because it is easier and because it tend to be more verbally valued by management then working on older product which tend to be snarked at as merely maintennance. The moment management praise also people working on less new and gives them appropriate salaries and autonomy, burning desire changes - except in few people who are truly naturally like that. It is win win…

I'm starting to have doubts about this line of reasoning. It just doesn't explain enough of the risky behavior I see. I'm starting to think it might be the same thing that gets young developers to put up with 10+ hour days. That feeling you get when you lose yourself in a problem for hours and hours. Being in a Flow state is seductive. Nobody gets that feeling when looking through the bug database or knowledge base,…

I love the feeling of being lost I solving and how it can extend for hours in any particular day. It can happen with both old tech and new tech, old project or new project - the only requirement is large task. (Impossible in agile max 4 hours long task environment).

I havent seen people in that state for weeks on end. It explains peeks of productivity followed by drops of productivity. Does not explain long term crunch.

And I mean, programming is not nearly as risky as Base jumping. You don't die coding in wrong direction and you still get paid for it. It is annoying to be wrong, but imo, we are overusing word risk.

Re: Red Hat is pretty good at being Red Hat

#64

Post by OneTimePaddy »

organsnyder wrote: post #2

My company (20,000+ employees) just started an engagement with Red Hat this week. We went with them for exactly what the article describes: open source software, packaged in an enterprise (i.e. expensive) fashion to make it palatable. We could have implemented these tools ourselves, but the executives appreciate the support contract and training, and I'm already seeing how we can benefit from the consultants' knowled…

Im sceptic none the less- usually buying into enterprise software, they try to lock there customers into a walled garden, where they are the sole provider of upgrades, new software and tailored products.

I have yet to see the enterprise software, that takes the step back like steam did and provides a plattform for cutomers to trade sofware additions.

Re: Red Hat is pretty good at being Red Hat

#65

Post by kiriakasis »

OneTimePaddy wrote: post #64
organsnyder wrote: post #2

My company (20,000+ employees) just started an engagement with Red Hat this week. We went with them for exactly what the article describes: open source software, packaged in an enterprise (i.e. expensive) fashion to make it palatable. We could have implemented these tools ourselves, but the executives appreciate the support contract and training, and I'm already seeing how we can benefit from the consultants' knowled…

Im sceptic none the less- usually buying into enterprise software, they try to lock there customers into a walled garden, where they are the sole provider of upgrades, new software and tailored products. I have yet to see the enterprise software, that takes the step back like steam did and provides a plattform for cutomers to trade sofware additions.

I think this comment is misleading; in many situation i believe you can upgrade to upstream if you want, simply you lose RH tech support.

In steam case they are not the one taking the blame when a game crashes (they take a image damage if they have too many unplayable games and they are getting criticism for it as of now for various reason) but the developer is expected to produce a game working on all platform it support as-is

Re: Red Hat is pretty good at being Red Hat

#66

Post by pjmlp »

StillBored wrote: post #3

I've been hearing the "boring" comment a lot lately, and I totally agree. I don't want the exciting filesystem (btrfs which just took me for a ride), or the exciting programming language/library that will strand me in 6 months with multiple man-years of work. No, what I want is boring. That means everything works as I expect it too, and it doesn't create drama every few months when the cool kids decide that the old w…

> A few years ago, I started challenging people at work when they were trying to pull in the latest language/library/toolkit, with a simple question. "How does that help our customers".

I take a similar approach. Anyone trying to win my vote has to prove what is the business value of adopting technology X.

Re: Red Hat is pretty good at being Red Hat

#67

Post by nvarsj »

dominotw wrote: post #37
nvarsj wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kubernetes owes its success largely to Openshift and Redhat's efforts. Without Openshift, Kubernetes would just be an interesting POC. Google doesn't dog food Kubernetes. Openshift has since the beginning, and contributed significantly to K8s as a result of actual production usage. Just take a look at the top contributors and you can see the kind of contributions of the Redhat guys. While I sort of agree with you on…

> Kubernetes owes its success largely to Openshift and Redhat's efforts. Without Openshift, Kubernetes would just be an interesting POC. How did you arrive at this conclusion. Curious to know more about redhats role in this.

My involvement w/ Kubernetes over the last few years. I've always considered k8s co-led by Google and Redhat. It's not hard to find this out for yourself - just take a look at the Github and the mailing lists, it's all open. K8s changed dramatically with Redhat's involvement.

Re: Red Hat is pretty good at being Red Hat

#68

Post by nvarsj »

jacques_chester wrote: post #49
dominotw wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Kubernetes owes its success largely to Openshift and Redhat's efforts. Without Openshift, Kubernetes would just be an interesting POC. How did you arrive at this conclusion. Curious to know more about redhats role in this.

Red Hat have done a lot of the productionising and packaging and got it running at a lot of companies. I don't fully agree that Red Hat has more ownership of the success of Kubernetes, though. They may have been necessary, but by no means sufficient. The aura of Google has probably had far more importance in the momentum to date.

CNCF owns the Kubernetes project. Google provides a lot of resources, and so does Redhat. Both are heavily involved in k8s, and both contributed significantly to its success.

Re: Red Hat is pretty good at being Red Hat

#69

Post by strooper »

Redhat is technically doing the enterprises a big favor by adding support on top of tested open source technologies and making the applications enterprise ready. Redhat (IBM, and so on) is also doing open source community a big favor by making the open source technologies ready to compete with the closed source enterprise application providers, such as- Oracle, Microsoft and so on.

If it is about packaging open source for profit, then Redhat has a lot to learn from Google. There is nothing that comes close to Android OS and Google's strategy to make the use of the term "open source" practically vague.

Re: Red Hat is pretty good at being Red Hat

#70

Post by tapirl »

smarterclayton wrote: post #28
breser wrote: post #5

OpenShift is a fork of Kubernetes. Case in point. OpenShift has functionality called a Route. That isn't in Kubernetes. Kubernetes of course went and added something similar called ingress. This means that anytime Kubernetes does a release that RedHat has to manage merging all those changes in with their local changes that aren't part of their project. This is exactly the same sort of thing that RedHat does with thei…

> The fact that RedHat has failed to get their modifications integrated upstream and have to maintain themselves is a massive failure on their part. Not really correct. We treated ingress as routes v2. Some of the design choices for ingress (which is still beta, and may change again before reaching stable) were improvements, but others created more problems. RBAC, most of the authentication code, a huge amount of per…

The extension API feature is cool, it will make k8s ecosystem grow more rapidly.

BTW, will all the extra features in OpenShift be ported as extension APIs?

Post reply on HN