Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

There are many applications which are distributed as helm charts. Those charts install multiple deployments, service accounts and whatnot. They barely document all these things.

So if you want to avoid helm, you gotta do a whole lot of reverse-engineering. You gotta render a chart, explore all the manifests, explore all the configuration options, find out if they're needed or not.

An alternative is to just use helm, invoking it and forgetting about it. You can't blame people for going the easy way, I guess...



Yep, this 100%. Every time there is a technology which has became the "de facto" standard, and there are people proposing "simpler alternatives", this is the kind of practical detail that makes a GIANT difference and that's usually never mentioned.

Network effect is a thing, Helm is the de facto "package manger" for Kubernetes program distribution. But this time there are generally no alternative instructions like

  tar xzf package.tar.gz; ./configure; make; adduser -u foo; chown -R foo /opt/foo


I think we are having different contexts here. I am mostly talking about selfwritten services and how writing, maintaining and deploying helm charts for them is a nightmare.

Regarding dependencies: Using some SaaS Kubernetes (Google GKE) for example, you'll typically use terraform for SQL and other Services anyway (atleast we do use Google CloudSQL and not some selfhosted postgres in k8s).

I find it interesting that cert-manager points to kubectl for new users and not helm: https://cert-manager.io/docs/installation/

But, for sure, there may be reasons to use helm, as you said. I'm sure it is overused, though.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: