Dear Google Cloud: Your Deprecation Policy Is Killing You • Hacker News Board

Re: Dear Google Cloud: Your Deprecation Policy Is Killing You

#411

Post by d1zzy » Mon, Aug 17, 2020, 7:35 PM UTC

hdfhu wrote: post #330

corin_ wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obviously having people that care about the work they do is a positive thing, but there are plenty of people in plenty of industries managing to do a good job despite only being in it for the money. It might not be a good business decision for Google, but surely if they create enough positions that are solely focussed on the boring stuff but are paid better to make up for it, there is a price point at which they'd ge…

That would be a career suicide to become a support engineer like this. 4 years later, when his stocks dry out, he'd have to switch the company and he'd need to tell a convincing story why the new company should pay him the new market rate. And "I supported legacy code" is not such a story. There's always an option to go to Microsoft and support legacy stuff for life, but beware that MS pays peanuts (relatively speaki…

To show that you deserve whatever pay you need to show impact and complexity. I don't think you would have a problem showing either when talking about maintaining Google scale products...

Re: Dear Google Cloud: Your Deprecation Policy Is Killing You

#412

Post by hdfhu » Mon, Aug 17, 2020, 8:48 PM UTC

d1zzy wrote: post #411

hdfhu wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would be a career suicide to become a support engineer like this. 4 years later, when his stocks dry out, he'd have to switch the company and he'd need to tell a convincing story why the new company should pay him the new market rate. And "I supported legacy code" is not such a story. There's always an option to go to Microsoft and support legacy stuff for life, but beware that MS pays peanuts (relatively speaki…

To show that you deserve whatever pay you need to show impact and complexity. I don't think you would have a problem showing either when talking about maintaining Google scale products...

Now we are talking. The thing is, only few work on those big projects. The rest are doing god knows what and have to jump ships often. If your resume says you spent 5 years maintaining a smallish noname project, your career is at risk. I don't believe that Google keeps all its 100k employees busy with complex and high impact projects.

Re: Dear Google Cloud: Your Deprecation Policy Is Killing You

#413

Post by ithkuil » Tue, Aug 18, 2020, 9:36 AM UTC

john-shaffer wrote: post #358

ithkuil wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you reached out to (community) support? My colleagues there tend to do their best to help the community. EDIT Disclaimer: I work for Bitnami; not in that team though. I reached out internally to see if this is a known issue, but it's Saturday... EDIT 2: does the downvote mean bitnami community support is so bad or did my wording offend anybody?

There are lots of random downvotes for no real reason. Sometimes perfectly ordinary posts are dead. I try to upvote gray posts if they're not worthless. That said, my take (and that of siblings) is that I'm much better off building my own containers than serving as unpaid Q&A for Bitnami. It would be smart to use containers built by people more expert than I am. Containers that are broken by default do not meet that…

It's not clear what happened though.

We use immutable tags like "4.2.8-debian-10-r50" which we never overwrite.

Then we have "semantic versioned" moving tags, like "4.2.8", "4.2", ... which resolve to the latest image matching that prefix.

Moving tags are what they are; I'm personally not a fan; all major popular images have that (https://hub.docker.com/_/golang, https://hub.docker.com/_/python, ...)

You can read more about Bitnami tagging scheme at: https://docs.bitnami.com/tutorials/understand-rolling-tags-c...

If you want to pin your image you should either use the most specific tag or just use the digest:

    $ crane digest bitnami/mongodb:4.2
    sha256:8650c2d92eea97732eae359a140ee86ee3923a2a19b19443e1dc01ec20d5387d
    $ docker run bitnami/mongodb:4.2@sha256:8650c2d92eea97732eae359a140ee86ee3923a2a19b19443e1dc01ec20d5387d

Now, we might have introduced a regression between some version of a container and the next minor version; shit happens; it's hard to tell without more specific information though.

> > We're careful to pin versions, and hadn't anticipated someone would re-write history and break published code.

> This is exactly the kind of thing that will make me ditch a company forever and never look back.

On the other hand, assuming that instead of a misunderstanding, what you saw is actually the image behind an immutable tag such as 4.2.8-debian-10-r50 being replaced, this is a serious security issue; somebody could have hacked docker hub, or crafted a valid certificate for docker hub and MitM'd you,

I'd also ditch a company forever and never look back if they honestly don't care about that problem, which I assure you it's not the case.

We'd greatly appreciate reporting such cases to security@bitnami.com / security@vmware.com .

Re: Dear Google Cloud: Your Deprecation Policy Is Killing You

#414

Post by Avamander » Tue, Aug 18, 2020, 11:45 AM UTC

Grue3 wrote: post #409

_dps wrote: post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agree with everything you said here, but let me riff on this > The "print" statement being a great example. Was it kind of weird? Sure. I am reminded of the Emerson quip "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds". The Py2 print statement is special/weird because it is a very important and special behavior, especially for newcomers. It's not randomly special, it's special because it models something that…

The funny thing is, if you type print with space it recognizes what you meant, and still wouldn't do it, raising an exception instead. It would've cost them literally nothing to support both ways to write print, since the parser has to detect statement print anyway.

Yes, but it would be a different way to do the same thing. It'd be anti-Pythonic.

Re: Dear Google Cloud: Your Deprecation Policy Is Killing You

#415

Post by fallenpegasus » Tue, Aug 18, 2020, 5:14 PM UTC

ryanobjc wrote: post #14

I used to work with Steve. He’s a good story teller. But a story teller tells good stories by having a fairly casual relationship with facts and the truth. For example, emacs lisp suffers from bitrot. Some core things haven’t changed in forever but also you can’t pick up elisp config from 15 years ago and it’s fine today. All live systems evolve and change. In this case emacs is just so slow that Steve thinks that it…

My elisp config file dates back to 1986. It's almost entirely unchanged. It still works. I have never had to remove anything because it stopped working. I just occasionally add stuff to it every few years.

Re: Dear Google Cloud: Your Deprecation Policy Is Killing You

#416

Post by jldugger » Thu, Aug 20, 2020, 5:27 PM UTC

Avamander wrote: post #341

rahimiali wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What cruft did py3 remove from py2?

Unintuitive string types, weird print function, unintuitive division, to name a few. I'm sure there are more things I can't recall at the moment.

> unintuitive division

Arguably worth it. Dividing 1 by 2 with "1 / 2" and getting 0 is a real 'wat' for novice programmers. And the workaround is a 'wat' for experts: instead of using a floating point division operator, cast one of your parameters to float.

Re: Dear Google Cloud: Your Deprecation Policy Is Killing You

#417

Post by jethro_tell » Sat, Aug 22, 2020, 5:21 AM UTC

TheAdamAndChe wrote: post #167

zimbatm wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It might be even deeper than that. I don't know if it's representative, the few Googlers I talked to were there only for the money. Their view of the company was actually quite negative. Keeping backward-compatibility requires people that care. That have enough pride in their work to counter-balance the grind.

the few Googlers I talked to were there only for the money. Their view of the company was actually quite negative. This is true for most people working for large multinational corporations. Good things can still be developed without passion.

Seems like this is probably true for the vast majority of people. I don't know why we circle jerk on passion and it's not very healthy. Sure I love to write code and most days I don't hate my job, but if I didn't need the money I'd rather write code for myself or open source projects, or do other things.

There's nothing wrong with that, and when I'm at work, I do my best to do a good job and make reliable, maintainable systems. Those two things aren't in conflict.