> On Apr 12, 2024, at 4:56 AM, David Arnold <dav...@pobox.com> wrote: > >> The vetting process needs some work, lads. > > More heresy than trolling, perhaps? > > It was thought-provoking for me. I wished I was there for the bar session > afterwards. > > d
It didn’t read like a troll paper to me. I periodically go through a similar exercise of thinking about how I would re-evaluate various Plan 9 decisions given the environment we find ourselves in, more than 35 years after the original work was done. I do have an answer to the question, “Do we really have to have our own kernel?”. Yes. Making decisions about fundamental principles upon which you build your system has profound impacts on every aspect of the software, including the kernel itself. Linux is not a good substitute for Plan 9. And, I take particular exception to recommending Kubernetes as a tool for deploying services. I am having to live through Kubernetes hell in my day job. And, if I hear about it being “declarative” as a virtue, I point to the 81,000+ lines (and growing) of YAML, that I defy any one human to comprehend. I do think it is a good exercise to reevaluate the premises on which one builds their systems in order to see if something needs to change or a completely different approach is warranted. I just come to different conclusions than the author of this paper. Kim _ C++ is an off-by-one error ------------------------------------------ 9fans: 9fans Permalink: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/T51f7f5a8927e1271-M53fcb07a2a24c78bc0fd5545 Delivery options: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/subscription
