← Back to context

Comment by reval

13 hours ago

I’ve seen this pattern play out before. The pushback on simpler alternatives seems from a legitimate need for short time to market from the demand some of the equation and a lack of knowledge on the supply side. Every time I hear an engineer call something hacky, they are at the edge of their abilities.

> Every time I hear an engineer call something hacky, they are at the edge of their abilities.

It's just like the systemd people talking about sysvinit. "Eww, shell scripts! What a terrible hack!" says the guy with no clue and no skills.

It's like the whole ship is being steered by noobs.

  • systemd would be a derail even if you weren’t misrepresenting the situation at several levels. Experienced sysadmins in my experience were the ones pushing adoption because they had to clean up the messes caused by SysV’s design limitations and flaws, whereas in this case it’s a different scenario where the extra functionality is both unneeded and making it worse at the core task.

    • > Experienced sysadmins in my experience were the ones pushing adoption because they had to clean up the messes caused by SysV’s design limitations and flaws

      That's funny. I used to have to clean up the messes caused by systemd's design limitations and flaws, until I built my own distro with a sane init system installed.

      Many of the noobs groaning about the indignity of shell scripts don't even realize that they could write init 'scripts' in whatever language they want, including Python (the language these types usually love so much, if they do any programming at all.)

      9 replies →