|
|
|
|
|
by loudlambda
1797 days ago
|
|
Agreed; I think a better analogy for Kubernetes is XML. So many wasted meetings about where to split up namespaces and should every last thing be an attribute or a subtag; none of that added business value. JSON took all those decisions off the table. And yes, huge industrials validly complained that JSON didn't cover X or Y or Z, but for most users JSON is a much better solution then XML. Kubernetes reminds me a lot of XML; there are too many decision points adding unnecessary complexity for the average user's needs. Too many foot guns. Too many unintuitive things. People keep on describing it as "declarative", which seems to be about as true as saying that Java is a functional language. Hopefully someday we'll have something actually declarative, and much more intuitive, something more like AWS's CDK. |
|
I don’t disagree about the exposed complexity, that’s a fundamental decision Kubernetes made about openness and extensibility. Everything is on a level playing field, there are no private APIs.