safaci2000

Well your also hardware locked. The last time I worked on a mainframe (about a decade), 8 mb of RAM was $1000, a network card was $800. Commodity hardware around the same time 8mb was probably $50 and a network card even a good one was most $100.

You're paying a premium for both the hardware and the lack of develops knowing EBSIDIC, JCL, Cobol, etc..

Actually, from what I remember of Oracle, that might be very similar. I remember having to pay license fees per core.

sure, I've touched on include a bit and removes some of the repetitive code.

I would rather have something like:

release.yml documentation.yml security-scan.yml

I know you can define all these in a common repo and then have a few lines to include them but it's not exactly the same IMO.

Not to mention that now I need to pull another repo to see what is going on and why the task no longer works.

This blog articles feels too black or white.

There's a middle ground between microservices and de-coupling. The UI can be written in JS/TS with a backend written in a more scalable faster language. It doesn't need to be all or nothing? Even if you stick to Ruby pulling some things apart due to separate concern/responsibilities is not a bad approach. Aka if you have workers/cleanup operations they don't need to live in the same code as your REST/MVC code base.

Also, it would be nice if their CI/CD could be defined in multiple .yml instead of one giant file that I seem to end up in most projects.

Yeah this was years ago but we had concept of 'hydrated' objects so you'd pass a flag to get back shallow object or the hydrated version that had all the relationship loaded as well.

Some flags for helpers that fetch additional data would be good.

They have UI helper tools with auto-completion, it's not a complete answer but it should make life easier. The select(*) not being supported seems to be an intentional choice unfortunately.

to be fair, a kernel dev is so far down his rabbit hole that web services and web tech is not something that they're particularly interested in. They also know intricate details on what my kernel does that I have no hope of ever understand or desire to. They exceed at what they're passionate about.

The first interaction I had with GraphQL the developer who introduced tried to make it TOO smart for its own good. It was building complex SQL dynamically which means the SQL that it was running was borderline non-deterministic.

(Aka. identified the foreign keys and primary keys linked them together and made all other fields options)

Things I don't like about GraphQL (In Java which was my experience)

1. Debugging it is annoying. There's no clear concise way to follow the code there seems to be some magic that happens where it isn't clear when certain parts of the code get invoked.

Things I like about it.

1. Lets you make multiple queries and reduce/extend the size of your payload as needed.

In my view graphQL is much better when you're not constrained by a SQL like backend. It's great at filtering the payloads which is great for mobile and such. It also allows you make multiple calls in one go which also means you can shoot yourself in the foot if you over do it.

I will call out that some of this is trauma based from my last experience. Having a more dynamic language that isn't Java may make the experience better but in general everytime we had to update the GraphQL code it was cringy.

Eventually started to gut the dynamic SQL and replacing it with a simple Query and then used GraphQL and trim the response which worked out much better.

Generally the question to ask is how many iterations of an endpoint do you need and is it worth introducing a new technology vs just having a few query parameters to do some filtering.

That being said, I'm now looking at some Query language to work with Neo4J so I'm back at looking at dynamic APIs. (:

Do you have a link for any docs on that? Last I looked it was a weird hack using LB that translated IPv6 to K8s' native IPV4

This might be in poor taste, but will the next Madden game be a zombie FPS next year?

Wait you mean asking: "how many turkeys are in turkey doesn't count as meaningful?"

I'm honestly surprised by quantity even. I'd question the quality from my brief experience with it I didn't find it that impressive.

The quantity aspect is also a bit surprising since it hasn't been that long that it's been released, so seeing a #1 leader is impressive in itself, even if it's free and integrated.

I mean I have a bunch of TravisCI projects that I really don't want to migrate over unless I have a good reason. The "if it works" leave it alone.

If there's enough motivation for people to switch it's impressive (or it shows how much people hate travis/jenkins/whatever CI they ARE using)

I've used Gitlab before, I have found it to be more complicated than I'd like. Not sure why but it feels harder to use.

These days Drone CI is my current favorite for OSS projects, I'm forced to use gitlab at work so that's what we use for internal projects.

I think Drone appeals to me for its simplicity, golang choice and docker everything. Not that it doesn't have its own set of issues as well.