This viral Sears story is sparking debate about today’s economy
He says full time retail workers could afford a comfortable middle class life back then, sparking a debate about when a steady job stopped being enough to get ahead.
[via/ GettyImages]
second: prefer a "topic-comment" style API with repetition than flat API where it's up to the service what fields can be configured together.
A good example is an API for defining http, tcp, or grpc ports
Instead, just create three structs for http, tcp, and grpc and put the configurable fields under each one
* end users know intuitively what fields they can set for a given protocol
* validation is just verifying only one protocol is specified, then validating that protocol
first: There's only one good way to do CRUDL APIs.
for each resource you define top-level structs for id (key for resource), spec (goal state of resource), meta (timestamps, status, etc.), and version (revision of resource in the system).
If you're daring List takes a filter.
* Reconciliation loops are easy, since you can persist id/version and only reconcile where one of the two structs has changed. Makes level-driven loops scale very well.
* Deep equality of goal state is easy because it's not spread across N fields on the response object.
I've somehow managed to get a cloudformation stack into an undeletable state and it won't even tell me why. thought things were better now :(. @AWSSupport ?
service mesh in the style of istio/linkerd/appmesh/&c is taking a bunch of networking features (routing, security, observability) that other stuff was missing or sucked at and providing it as a product. and so you sprinkle a few sidecars around and boom! features.
over time, people should just move to them because they provide a well-integrated and ~*idiomatic*~ solution for getting all of the features in the stuff you're already using.
reading the activitystreams rfc and i'm stunlocked on links being either objects or strings. why complicate parsing like that?





