181–190 of 253 posts
People don't understand how much RSS is useful... I'm still angry at Google for killing Reader. It was the best way to consume content on the web.
I understand RSS completely and the goals, but honestly? I don't find it useful at all. I'm always surprised how many people on HN claim to still use it.
Hey all, I lead the team that runs this site. We moved our site to a different infrastructure that doesn't support the automatic generation of RSS feeds. I'm painfully aware that this isn't the best solution right now. I needed our team to hit a deadline for migrating all the content to the new system, and then manage cleanup of known missing functionality after. We are working on making sure this lands asap. Paul
> We moved our site to a different infrastructure that doesn't support the automatic generation of RSS feeds. I had been wondering why https://developer.chrome.com/feeds suddenly died. > I needed our team to hit a deadline Why?
Hey all, I lead the team that runs this site. We moved our site to a different infrastructure that doesn't support the automatic generation of RSS feeds. I'm painfully aware that this isn't the best solution right now. I needed our team to hit a deadline for migrating all the content to the new system, and then manage cleanup of known missing functionality after. We are working on making sure this lands asap. Paul
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's lots of reasons some of which I can't go into details about, but there are some that I can: There is a freeze to the new infrastructure's product features until after the new year and we needed to get this in before then (we can land feed support without a product feature change) The people I have working on the older infrastructure will be on new projects for our team in the new year.
There was a bug in the old RSS implementation (the last-updated date was always Jan 1st 1980) so it would be great if you fixed that when you re-add it
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's lots of reasons some of which I can't go into details about, but there are some that I can: There is a freeze to the new infrastructure's product features until after the new year and we needed to get this in before then (we can land feed support without a product feature change) The people I have working on the older infrastructure will be on new projects for our team in the new year.
Were the deadlines, feature freezes, and project reshuffling imposed on you from above, or were they your decisions? In a blog post two months ago you said, "I've taken the decision..." https://web.dev/blog/webdev-migration There was clearly someone in Google management who decided that RSS could be broken. Why is this important? Well, for example, it seems that the RSS feed was already broken when this important ann…
• The people working on web.dev decided to migrate to a common Google site platform, so that they could focus on content rather than maintaining an ad-hoc infrastructure,
• That platform happens not to support RSS (yet), so they've done the best they can in the meantime, filing a bug with the platform, creating the https://developer.chrome.com/feeds info page acknowledging the issue, and even creating unofficial feeds.
You could phrase this as “someone in Google management who decided that RSS could be broken”, but relative to the big decision of whether to spend effort maintaining your own custom infrastructure or just focus on the content, the presence or absence of RSS support is probably just not a big factor.
[One could imagine a culture of "never migrate to a new system unless it fully supports every single functionality of the old system", but that (just like "never launch a product/feature unless you're confident you're going to support it forever") is simply not in Google's culture, where there are always ongoing migrations between "the old system that is deprecated and the new system that is not ready yet" — but that is "just" a cultural problem rather than anyone consciously deciding that RSS could be broken.]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I doubt how many admins are comfortable with (or allowed to) using a non-approved third-party tool to manage their organization, despite open source and all that
The third party tool is based on the official google-api-python-client. It’s about as non-approved as ad hoc shell scripts.
This is hilarious big-company shit, that engineer on Chrome devrel team finds it easier to actually just write his own unofficial RSS feed-generator and make it public [1] — the feed for this blog is at [2] — than for the "Internal issues have been filed with the DevSite team" to get worked on [3]. And who knows when this will rise to a priority for that team? In the old Google, it would have been easier for anyone t…
when roughly would you place the "old Google" turning point?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well it's all gradual and diffuse; for that matter there are still pockets of the "old Google" around today. My point here was just about, in a big company, different teams having their own domains that you don't/can't interfere in, rather than a free-for-all where everyone feels part of the same whole and can just jump in. (Which was probably never going to work anyway, so maybe encouraging such a culture in the fir…
Agree with this take. People always assume some ulterior motive to every single decision google does, but things are often much simpler than that, and mostly all it comes to prioritization...
Hey all, I lead the team that runs this site. We moved our site to a different infrastructure that doesn't support the automatic generation of RSS feeds. I'm painfully aware that this isn't the best solution right now. I needed our team to hit a deadline for migrating all the content to the new system, and then manage cleanup of known missing functionality after. We are working on making sure this lands asap. Paul
I'm leaning toward giving the benefit of the doubt in this case, but why be oblique like this? Why not say "We are working on adding RSS" or "we are aiming to restore RSS support"?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agree with this take. People always assume some ulterior motive to every single decision google does, but things are often much simpler than that, and mostly all it comes to prioritization...
Hanlon's Razor: Never ascribe to malice that which can easily be explained by stupidity.