> On Apr 12, 2024, at 4:56 AM, David Arnold <davida@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