A problem I had with Gitlab Auto CI/CD was that even though it fully abstracted away Kubernetes and Helm, when something went wrong I was suddenly confronted with having to learn and understand all of it.
Then when I fully understood it, writing my own simple .gitlab-ci.yml was orders of magnitude easier and simpler than using the big abstracted auto ci/cd system.
Waypoint seems to be similarly abstracting away a lot of complicated details. Is there a philosophy about what waypoint expects of its users, especially when deployments break out of the cookie cutter standard situations?
A problem I had with Gitlab Auto CI/CD was that even though it fully abstracted away Kubernetes and Helm, when something went wrong I was suddenly confronted with having to learn and understand all of it.
Then when I fully understood it, writing my own simple .gitlab-ci.yml was orders of magnitude easier and simpler than using the big abstracted auto ci/cd system.
Waypoint seems to be similarly abstracting away a lot of complicated details. Is there a philosophy about what waypoint expects of its users, especially when deployments break out of the cookie cutter standard situations?