We recently covered some of the complex decisions and architecture behind Cycle’s brand new interface. In this final installment, we’ll peer into our crystal ball and glimpse into the future of the Cycle portal. Cycle already is a production-ready DevOps platform capable of running even the most demanding websites and applications. But, that doesn’t mean we can’t make the platform even more functional, and make DevOps even simpler to manage.
The report is so absurd and naive that it makes no sense to critique it in detail. - Kent Beck responding to the McKinsey Report. Luckily this was a hollow threat, because a few days later he and fellow blogger Gergely Orosz released a two part blog series critiquing not exactly Mckinsey's report but... any report that tried to put “effort based” metrics at the top of the list for things to track.
RabbitMQ is a messaging broker that helps different parts of a software application communicate with each other. Think of it as a middleman that takes care of sending and receiving messages so that everything runs smoothly. Since its release in 2007, it's gained a lot of traction for being reliable and easy to scale. It's a solid choice if you're dealing with complex systems and want to make sure data gets where it needs to go.
In our last installment, we covered the myriad of new UI changes added to Cycle’s portal. In this part, we walk through five of the tough engineering choices made when developing the new interface, discussing the alternatives that were considered, and shining a light on some of the technology our engineering team utilizes today.
After a span of 5 long years, we've bid farewell to Cycle's old portal. Our engineering team has been working tirelessly over the last 10 months to bring a fresh, new interface to the platform for our users. This new design encapsulates the wealth of insights we've gained during this period. Just last week, we took the decisive step of launching it into production, and the initial feedback has been overwhelmingly positive.
The dev world was on fire this weekend, as news of yet another major open-source project was revealed to be in the midst of an identity crisis. The unsettling trend is clear: hit a certain adoption threshold, and then swap the licensing in an attempt to turn dedicated fans into revenue streams. With more companies searching for a sustainable business model and attempting to appease shareholders, the only certainty we have is, what was free yesterday, might be paid tomorrow.
In the dynamic landscape of software development, the terms DevOps and Platform Engineering have garnered attention. Both concepts, although distinct, aim at a shared goal: to build efficient, streamlined systems that simplify code deployment within organizations.
If you’re in DevOps, you know the word ‘Kubernetes’. While saying that mouthful of a word (generally shortened to k8s in text) would have gotten you a weird look and someone asking if you need to lie down before 2017, it’s been sacrilegious to even consider starting a project without architecting your solution on top of it in the last few years.
In recent discussions about cloud-based GPU workloads, I was struck by these two recurring challenges: As the Head of Customer Success for a platform that confronts both of these problems, I wanted to take a moment to talk about their origin, what teams can do to mitigate, and finish up with a brief look at how Cycle might help.
