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

Etcd, or, why modern software makes me sad

roguelazer.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

421–430 of 648 posts

Re: Etcd, or, why modern software makes me sad

#421

Post by umvi »

threeseed wrote: post #417
umvi wrote: post #329

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> stop threatening to remove the normal HTTP API, some of us find that a lot easier to debug I've seen the trend toward complexity in other projects too, and it harms not just ease of debugging, but ease of hacking. Take, for example, Swagger UI[0] v2 was so simple. It was vanilla JS using jQuery. I, as an embedded systems developer, was able to easily hack it so it could read in the OpenAPI JSON from a database and…

Complaining about an open source project changing technologies because you can't be bothered to learn them is a bit rich. Fork Swagger v2 and make your own improvements. No one is stopping you and it's what open source is all about after all.

> Complaining about an open source project changing technologies because you can't be bothered to learn them is a bit rich

Web technology is its own beast. I invested a long time learning and mastering AngularJS only for all that work and knowledge to be flushed down the toilet over the next few years. Web tech has terrible ROI so that's why I "can't be bothered" to learn the latest one. I'm salty specifically about Swagger jumping on instead of sticking with simple vanilla JS that everyone understands.

> Fork Swagger v2 and make your own improvements

Yeah, that's exactly what I did...

Re: Etcd, or, why modern software makes me sad

#423

Post by zaphirplane »

flatline wrote: post #233
IggleSniggle wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TypeScript is a funny one. I love the language, but at the same time, I totally agree with the premise that it is unnecessary complexity! And yet I swear by it. I can't explain why there's not more cognitive dissonance there. JavaScript taught me to love async, then functional programming, and TypeScript taught to me to love static types. I'm now desperately wishing for a world of OCaml/Haskell, but where are you goi…

What is unnecessarily complex about TypeScript? It's JavaScript, with static typing plus type inference, and pretty nice generics. The ecosystem of modern JS surrounding it is horribly complex but TypeScript itself seems like a fairly straightforward programming language.

There is complexity in the type system with signatures like

``` function partialCall(f: (...args: [...T, ...U]) => R, ...headArgs: T) {

`

Re: Etcd, or, why modern software makes me sad

#424

Post by inopinatus »

cytzol wrote: post #337
jedberg wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, there have been many container breakout CVEs, and I'm sure there will be more: https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvekey.cgi?keyword=container But let me ask the question another way. What security do you gain by being in a container instead of on a server without a container?

> What security do you gain by being in a container instead of on a server without a container? I'm not a container guru, but... this is obvious, right? You have to break out the container, which is an extra layer. In order to get root on the server, you need: • Without container: application vulnerability (to gain access to the OS) + kernel vulnerability (to gain access to root) • With container: application vulnera…

Containers share a platform. They increase attack surface by supplying a vector to any neighbour, by being something that can be attacked at all, and by requiring another control plane that requires credentials, making it a social engineering opportunity as well as being another component that itself can be vulnerable.

They are not an additional shell of defence, they do not reduce your blast radius.

Re: Etcd, or, why modern software makes me sad

#425

Post by dilandau »

raincom wrote: post #52
dilandau wrote: post #9

There's a lot of justified hatred for kubernetes, but for fuck's sake why did anyone adopt it in the first place, if they didn't understand what they were getting into? It's like the startups from 10 years ago who absolutely had to use MongoDB because "scale", and then they never get off the ground because they're trying to implement ACID from first principles.

There is a cost for not getting on a hype train. CEOs rather waste a couple of billion dollars on that machine learning/AI hype train, because if they don't hop on that train, Wall street folks see these companies old-school, not innovating. So, they bring in Chief AI officer and write about about how machine learning gonna help their companies in the Quarterly reports. Even if they lose $2B in this AI venture, just…

AI is cargo-culting from executives in publicly traded companies.

Kubernetes is a grassroots phenomenon of developers experimenting with self-immolation while padding the resume.

Major difference. Your example comes from the top. Kubernetes comes from the bottom, and is more insidious in my opinion.

Re: Etcd, or, why modern software makes me sad

#426

Post by GekkePrutser »

Foxboron wrote: post #386
GekkePrutser wrote: post #373

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree sysvinit was no longer sufficient for today's needs. The issue I have with systemd was mainly related to its heaviness not really fitting in with Arch's simplicity. And with the products of corporatism seeping through even one the most noncommercial variants of Linux. Basically what cwyers mentioned above. I've been putting up with systemd as all the distributions I use have moved to it, but I never really li…

>The issue I have with systemd was mainly related to its heaviness not really fitting in with Arch's simplicity. Arch is a pragmatic distribution first and foremost. If we can build systemd, and ship it as-is to have a complete init, and more features along with it, that is much more enticing then the alternative. > I think it (openrc) would have been a good choice for Arch, for me it would have been better than syst…

I understand, and it was not my intention to drag the systemd discussion up again. It was just one of the many things I thought of after reading cwyers post which really resonated with me, and the parent article as well.

And there are things I do like about systemd, I also have to say. Especially the way you can pass a variable to a server with @, like run 2 instances on different ports.

I know very well that the rc scripts were a pain to maintain as I've written some as well in the past. So I really understand the benefit of upstream-provided service configs.

The transition to systemd for me as a user was just a bit more difficult. It deviates so much from earlier conventions, and adapting it I found difficult. It enforces a lot more than just the init system.

For some reason I always end up having to compile some of the software I use myself, and having to make scripts then. I found this a lot easier with OpenRC than with Systemd (having pretty much no knowledge of either).

But anyway I'm just one user and you support millions, I know you're making the right choices for the platform. Thanks for taking the time to reply to me in fact!

Re: Etcd, or, why modern software makes me sad

#427

Post by IggleSniggle »

rubber_duck wrote: post #399
jazzyjackson wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It hasn't been a big detriment for me as someone learning Typescript on their own, but it is another moving target for looking up "how do I do x..." and finding most of the forum posts are a little outdated and the latest version of Typescript has a different/better way of doing things than just a year or two ago. I find myself scrolling through github issues comparing my tsconfig to figure out why my stack behaves d…

That was my experience with TS maybe two years ago - at this point project scaffolding tools are good enough to generate sane output that I spend a little bit of time upfront but then keep plowing away. Maybe I got better at it as well - but I haven't kept up with TS news in a long time and I don't feel like I'm missing out on stuff or encountering things I don't understand. I've written >50k LoC of TS in last few mo…

Typically for me the time cost is in going down rabbitholes to attempt to improve implicit static types for getting closer to "whole program" functional type inference (TypeScript repeatedly seduces me into this), and the decision inflection point is generally not for application code but for the space between application and script code, things that you might also write Perl or python scripts to accomplish...the types are especially useful in this context because they tell you a lot more about the script than your typical script, but they also introduce a bunch of overhead for a few lines of code.

Re: Etcd, or, why modern software makes me sad

#428

Post by lemmsjid »

duncan_bayne wrote: post #370
lemmsjid wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem, I think, is that the article presents all of its views as almost self evidently true. If you distill it down, the complaint is that etcd added gRPC. I think it was a good move for an infrastructure piece like etcd to add gRPC. Now I can just grab a generated client in a language of my choice. There's certainly valid critiques of gRPC / protocol buffers but I've found things like gRPC and Thrift to reduce…

> Now I can just grab a generated client in a language of my choice. No, you can just grab a generated client in a language of your choice if that language happens to be supported by protobuf. This is a massive regression from the openness of HTTP REST APIs.

That would have been a critique of Thrift, and a valid one, but gRPC has an http gateway interface with semantics for how the RPC calls map to REST calls and JSON. As long as that is supported, then there does not need to be a regression.

Re: Etcd, or, why modern software makes me sad

#429

Post by jessaustin »

nobleach wrote: post #409
mattigames wrote: post #396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Browsers should just bite the bullet and add TypeScript support.

At the rate the Typescript is releasing, that'd be a support nightmare. Perhaps a better solution is for TC39 to propose optional types. It could be modeled on Typescript for sure, but it would still be backward compatible.

Javascript of today borrows liberally from coffeescript of yesterday, so it would make sense for javascript of tomorrow to borrow liberally from typescript of today.

Re: Etcd, or, why modern software makes me sad

#430

Post by BrainlingPdx »

gcbw3 wrote: post #250
loriverkutya wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He is talking in absolutes (Kubernetes being the worst piece of software, etc) and trying to convince reader that "megacorporations" are the faceless evil enemy and they are making everything worse for everybody. Either you are with him or against him (servant of the evil megacorps' interest), there is no middle ground. This person is not looking for a conversation, but looking for a fight. He seems to be angry and c…

> "megacorporations" are the faceless evil enemy There are some irony on the text, but to understand this is very naive. The critic is at malicious/dumb people who latch to technologies without understanding them. For argument sake, see how many people are defending coreOS etc, and how they claim to have decided to like it based on their superb expertise, yet they will likely fail to explain to you chroot or anything…

So your response to him pointing out that the author talks in absolutes, and tries to shit on any tech he doesn't like...is to talk in absolutes and shit on tech you don't like, with little jabs and dumb in jokes? Very convincing.
Post reply on HN