Why IBM, not Kyndryl?
It's interesting to see how it fits into the overall IBM org.
IBM to buy HashiCorp in $6.4B deal
211–220 of 391 posts
Re: IBM to buy HashiCorp in $6.4B deal
#212Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's interesting. I found Go to be a very productive and easy language, coming from Typescript. But I had a similar experience like yours with PHP, I just couldn't get into it.
After having written probably over 100k lines of Go code, my impression is that Go is simple, but not easy. The language has very few features to learn, but that results in a lot of boilerplate code and there are more than a few footguns burried in the language itself. (My favorite [1]) I find it very hard to write expressive, easy to read code and more often than not I see people using massive switch-case statements…
I’ve always found that the Go language is simple in all the ways that don’t matter.
(In contrast to languages like Haskell and Clojure, which are simple in most of the ways that matter.)
Re: IBM to buy HashiCorp in $6.4B deal
#213Earlier quoted context omitted.
Red Hat is a shell of itself. There is no appetite for taking on Terraform when Ansible is their ugly baby.
I've found they are complements to each other. One provisions infra, the other customized that infra for your needs. But I could be totally off-base.
Yes. I did this a while back: https://github.com/radekg/terraform-provisioner-ansible. That received some contributions from IBM. Unfortunately, HC never wanted to maintain it, then in 0.15 they replaced provisioners with providers or plugins (can’t remember anymore). I had a couple of discussions with their OSS head for TF at the time but the bottom line from them was „why don’t you rewrite it in your spare time”. The problem was their replacement didn’t give access to the underlying communicator (your SSH or winrm). So I hung the towel.
Re: IBM to buy HashiCorp in $6.4B deal
#214So, will they now add JCL extensions to HCL? Will they be pulling TCL into the fold be the next plan?
They'll do what they should have done years ago: give up on all this fuddy duddy syntax and just go with XML. ;-)
Was this supposed to make my eye twitch? Don’t give them any ideas.
Re: IBM to buy HashiCorp in $6.4B deal
#215Well, it was nice while it lasted! HashiCorp always felt like a company made by actual engineers, not "bean counters". Now it will just be another cog in the IBM machine, slowly grinding it down, removing everything attractive, just like RedHat and CentOS. Hopefully this will create a new wave off innovation, and someone will create something to replace the monopoly on IaC that IBM now owns.
I don’t understand people’s beef with IBM. They have been responsible for incredible R&D within computing. I even LIKE redhat/fedora! HashiCorp had already been sold out since waaaay before this acquisition and I also don’t understand why their engineers are seen as “special”…
I just got to spin down a bunch of infra that was originally in Softlayer, which IBM acquired years ago. IBM were terrible to work with, they frequently crashed services by evacuating VMs from hosts and then not powering them back up, and only notifying us long after our own monitoring detected it. Won't miss that.
Re: IBM to buy HashiCorp in $6.4B deal
#216Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nobody else is bow allowed to make a public offering of a terraform-using product. That is, you can not provide terraform as a service. Gitlab, Azure DevOps, etc all have to move to something else as they can not provide terraform builders without a special license. This was a major blow to the participating open source community. The license bow used is also vague and untested.
Also you should know that while the terraform language is okay (albeit a little too dogmatic in a functional programming sense for my tastes), the terraform cloud product (runners for terraform executions) is pretty terrible, slow, and overpriced, snatching defeat from the jaws of victory based on the terraform language. This encouraged at least 4 companies to launch terraform-cloud-like products, and rather than com…
Totally agree. I had to switch to Scalr. I’m now paying more than I did with Terraform Cloud, but I’m happier and finally have all the features I needed.
Those who take this to the next level by offering Enterprise like features such as change window and approval gates from Jira/ServiceNow will land whales.
Re: IBM to buy HashiCorp in $6.4B deal
#217Re: IBM to buy HashiCorp in $6.4B deal
#218Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yet another example of why I think it's a mistake to take your company public. If I put in the work to build up a successful business, no way would I ever let it be turned into a machine that ignores long term health for the sake of making the stock price go up.
If companies didn’t go public regular people would not be able to invest in innovation. As much as people hate it, public markets democratize access to investments
True but no company has a vested interest in the democratization of investment. IPOs are purely about getting paydays for founders.
Re: IBM to buy HashiCorp in $6.4B deal
#219terraform changed to business source license pretty recently too: https://www.hashicorp.com/blog/hashicorp-adopts-business-sou...
> terraform changed to business source license pretty recently Now we know why!
I suspect you have the causality on this backwards: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38579175
Re: IBM to buy HashiCorp in $6.4B deal
#220Earlier quoted context omitted.
Heh at “got their payout”. HashiCorp IPO’d at $80, employees are locked up for 6 months. This sale is at $35.
They IPO'd in 2021.
Yes. And many of the Heroku employees you speak of would have got RSUs that owed taxes on an $80 basis, been trading far below that for most of that time, and now have a maximum expected value of $35.
This is not a pay day for many people. Anybody who got a pay day were those that could liquidate in the IPO.