(Admittedly, @nicolefv, @jezhumble and @realgenekim didn’t help when they statistically proved that he might have been onto something with all that de-coupling and team-alignment…)
Software architecture is in crisis, and the way to fix it is a hefty dose of anarchy.
(Admittedly, @nicolefv, @jezhumble and @realgenekim didn’t help when they statistically proved that he might have been onto something with all that de-coupling and team-alignment…)
I think he saved us; bringing us back to the path of value-delivery and independent services, but now with added independent teams.
(See https://t.co/B2hWmXhIqe if you need convincing)
*Shudder*
And consequently many, many #microservices adoptions failed; with #microservices themselves getting an undeserved bad name in the process.
What we need is a workable way to approach them, and in the process realise the associated benefits of both team autonomy and improvements in system architecture.
I’ll describe what it is and you could do it. Hopefully you’ll see how it offers the best (only?) way out of this mess.
Straight away that means how we are used to doing architecture, via all-powerful architects taking all the decisions, is going to have to stop.
\u201cYou may think in describing anarchism as a theory of organisation I am propounding a deliberate paradox: \u2018anarchy\u2019 you may consider to be, by definition, the _opposite_ of organisation. In fact, however, \u2018anarchy\u2019 means the absence of government, the absence of _authority_. ..."
— Andrew Harmel-Law \U0001f3e1 (@al94781) November 29, 2020
(As @Grady_Booch has said “architecture represents the set of significant design decisions that shape the form and the function of a system, where significant is measured by cost of change.”)
So the first test is can an #AnarchisticArchitecture deliver on this?
The answer is "Yes".
More from Software
Kubernetes vs Serverless offerings
Why would you need Kubernetes when there are offerings like Vercel, Netlify, or AWS Lambda/Amplify that basically manage everything for you and offer even more?
Well, let's try to look at both approaches and draw our own conclusions!
🧵⏬
1️⃣ A quick look at Kubernetes
Kubernetes is a container orchestrator and thus needs containers to begin with. It's a paradigm shift to more traditional software development, where components are developed, and then deployed to bare metal machines or VMs.
There are additional steps now: Making sure your application is suited to be containerized (12-factor apps, I look at you: https://t.co/nuH4dmpUmf), containerizing the application, following some pretty well-proven standards, and then pushing the image to a registry.
After all that, you need to write specs which instruct Kubernetes what the desired state of your application is, and finally let Kubernetes do its work. It's certainly not a NoOps platform, as you'll still need people knowing what they do and how to handle Kubernetes.
⏬
2️⃣ A quick look at (some!) serverless offerings
The offer is pretty simple: You write the code, the platform handles everything else for you. It's basically leaning far to the NoOps side. There is not much to manage anymore.
Take your Next.js / Nuxt.js app, point the ...
Why would you need Kubernetes when there are offerings like Vercel, Netlify, or AWS Lambda/Amplify that basically manage everything for you and offer even more?
Well, let's try to look at both approaches and draw our own conclusions!
🧵⏬
1️⃣ A quick look at Kubernetes
Kubernetes is a container orchestrator and thus needs containers to begin with. It's a paradigm shift to more traditional software development, where components are developed, and then deployed to bare metal machines or VMs.
There are additional steps now: Making sure your application is suited to be containerized (12-factor apps, I look at you: https://t.co/nuH4dmpUmf), containerizing the application, following some pretty well-proven standards, and then pushing the image to a registry.
After all that, you need to write specs which instruct Kubernetes what the desired state of your application is, and finally let Kubernetes do its work. It's certainly not a NoOps platform, as you'll still need people knowing what they do and how to handle Kubernetes.
⏬
2️⃣ A quick look at (some!) serverless offerings
The offer is pretty simple: You write the code, the platform handles everything else for you. It's basically leaning far to the NoOps side. There is not much to manage anymore.
Take your Next.js / Nuxt.js app, point the ...
You May Also Like
I just finished Eric Adler's The Battle of the Classics, and wanted to say something about Joel Christiansen's review linked below. I am not sure what motivates the review (I speculate a bit below), but it gives a very misleading impression of the book. 1/x
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
As someone\u2019s who\u2019s read the book, this review strikes me as tremendously unfair. It mostly faults Adler for not writing the book the reviewer wishes he had! https://t.co/pqpt5Ziivj
— Teresa M. Bejan (@tmbejan) January 12, 2021
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
![Peter McCormack [Jan/3\u279e\u20bf \U0001f511\u220e]](https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/1524287442307723265/_59ITDbJ_normal.jpg)