Hacker News Reader

Comment by dschep | Hacker News Reader

> - Vendor lock-in: although I try to minimise this and have a clear picture of where the lock-in lies, it is very much present.

The post isn't loading so I don't know exactly what it's in reference to (AWS lambda, the framework, the more generic idea?). But, the serverless framework[0] supports all major cloud providers (AWS, Google, & Azure) as well as self-hostable options like OpenWhisk and Kubeless.

[0] https://github.com/serverless/serverless

View on HN

Yes, but when I started putting this together it was very immature, as in: it crashed a lot. I didn't really want to lock myself in to an immature product either, and I also didn't really like having to run specific commands to get to a certain setup, rather than describing the layout of my desired infrastructure.

I may be naive (or just witless), but don’t you kind of end up with vendor lock-in to serverless itself?

The first step in their example is “login to your serverless account”.

My most recent serverless configuration file was probably approximately 90 percent aws specific (cloudformation) syntax anyways.

Maybe the image is outdated? The Quick Start doesn't seem to talk about Serverless accounts.

You have to make a choice at some level of the stack, for me, that was serverless as the deployment framework. You could probably use terraform or ansible + some custom scripts, but then you could argue you're locked into terraform or ansible ;)

The login thing isn't actually necessary (or if it is, that's new)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com