[raffraffraff]

I know a company (don't ask) that only uses AWS, yet for unspecified "security" reasons (all theatre) and to avoid vendor lock-in, they've built their own terrible implementations of services provided by AWS. Don't get me wrong, if you've got some good infra/sec people who can deploy and properly manage Vault, an entire observability stack, KOPS Kubernetes etc, good luck to you. But these guys didn't really have the chops to do this properly, nor did they hire sufficient people support and maintain each ball of crap when they moved onto the hobby-build. And they lazily avoided documenting anything, pretending that this was intentional ("documentation is code", except their codebases are sprawling spaghetti with very few useful markdown downs or comments). There aren't even any strict naming conventions. So basically it's incredibly difficult, complex, manual and scary to deploy a new data center, or indeed, even modify the existing ones. There are maybe 3 people in the whole company who gatekeep security access and change. I genuinely wonder if they had a race with the guys at Plain, who'd get their stack off AWS the quickest? My guess: Plain would win.

Sorry, I needed to vent :( But my point is, sometimes it's easier to avoid building the things that your team doesn't know how to build. And maybe you can't hire the right people to build it for you. If they're all comfortable with their severless stack, they're far better off than the other company I'm talking about.

Oh god is it Monday morning again?

[ldjkfkdsjnv]

Haha you know what, I've worked on tech stacks like you described. They were terrible, and all the original developers left the dumpster fire. But when reading the code, sometimes I would just smile, I could tell they had a damn good time writing the code. And yeah, it costed us a year to fix, but still, I would just chuckle when reading their abstractions. Sometimes, its just fun :)

[getcrunk]

Any examples?