Hacker News Reader

Comment by rektide | Hacker News Reader

if they're going to deprecate the thing, i feel like they have an obligation to at least state why. letting random joe's from the internet chime in with sympathies explaining why they agree with the decision to remove good well used technology doesn't feel quite up the the bar i'd like to see for technologies being removed.

View on HN

If AWS is deprecating something, then it's likely that literally no one was using it and the few that might have been were given complimentary consulting to move them off of it.

Yes, exactly. I get a billion messages a year about obscure lambda runtimes expiring for junk I provisioned half a decade ago and haven't ever invoked.

There's no way this had any real users if it is being quietly turned off.

It sounds like there are customers using it and they will have a year to migrate off of the feature.

There are undoubtedly a couple personal accounts with buckets configured in 2014 which have been idling at $.04/mo ever since, and they're allowing the grace period just in case. But likely no clear active users.

I think Bittorrent's history makes handwaving deprecation away slightly less easy.

I mean, you're probably right - that none of their $100m contracts were using the feature. But otherwise, why remove it? What was it costing them in maintenance and support? Were there actually any security issues?

An obligation to who? For every interesting explanation there are likely a hundred banal ones that rationally lead to the same conclusion.

I would assume that no one paying them anything was using it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com