> If multiple teams working on interdependent components can't communicate well enough to keep from stepping on each other's toes, imposing technical barriers probably isn't going to make things better.
But it actually does, and there is a lot of data to prove it. When you have a big project and a bunch of teams, the first thing you build is boundaries / walls. Then you get to defining interfaces between interdependent services. And this frees them up to get hacking on their modules in parallel - without stepping on each others' toes. Communication would have definitely helped, but it is way easier for smaller teams to own and operate their services and try to get a big organization plough through a big mess.
That said, microservices are just one way to solve a problem, and not always the right way. But there is always a place where you would look at the problem, the organization that is tasked to solve it, and it would fit just right in.
Make it part of google one. "Buy any google one storage plan and get google meet for free". At least then they can tie it to something people are used to paying for.
This is just the next step in the evolution of browsers into full fledged operating systems.
The Web APIs would become the next POSIX.
And we might end up with uni-kernels that would just be running browsers on bare-metal. Want to be stalked, here is your Chrome OS. Want privacy, here is your Firefox OS. (Where did I last hear of these? Hmm...)
Who knows, when all this is over someone might make a browser for this new browser OS.
The pricing model changed a few months ago for the worse, IMO. And Migadu just gave one month’s time for users to switch from the previous free tier (with a footer ad) to a paid tier. During a worldwide pandemic with debilitating effects on many people, this was a move that wasn’t thought through. I’d personally not trust Migadu to care much for customers based on trying it in the past and seeing this move unfold.
Pandemic hit everyone, including us, that is why we cannot afford to subsidize free users anymore.
The new paid tier is ~$1.6 monthly or about 5 cents a day, which is affordable in every corner of the planet. We also never refused to help those that by some chance cannot afford it.
In case you happen to see this late reply, I do not have a problem with moving to completely paid plans since "free" costs you money and time. But the short notice of one month during a time like this was really not thought through at all from the users' perspective. Unless you were going bankrupt, this is unconscionable. Your update and rebranding didn't say one word about the short notice and the reasoning behind it.
Also, the lowest paid tier has limitations whereas the next tier after that is a huge jump in price.
For these reasons, I cannot consider Migadu as a trustworthy provider right now.
The notice was actually given in early August, and the change took effect in October. We have extended trial to all that asked for it without problems. We did say in the update what happened.
The lowest paid plan has only limitations in tools for multi-admin, everything else is the same with lower quota obviously, but that is already double what was on the free plan.
All good, just that has nothing to do with trust. Trust works both ways. There is no such thing as free lunch, and we have always called the "free" plan "unlimited trial" with clear statement that we can revoke it at anytime.
JMAP does solve the same problems, and then some -- looking at the specs, it's more of a 1:1 mapping between IMAP+SMTP. I'd say that if you're looking at implementing _all the functionality of a modern email client_ you might want to look at that. If your use-case is just wanting to fetch emails from a bunch of inbox folders in real-time, potentially with some querying/filtering, I'd say JMAP is a bit overwhelming. Sure, it has some clients/libraries available, but only a few.
imapapi, in my opinion, being a RESTful API, appears to have a much simpler surface, seems easier to play with using curl, and if you're developing a bunch of RESTful services that use Swagger, it fits better with your stuff. So, less dev-time to use :-)
JMAP is definitely more complicated, but that complexity enables some very useful features. You can search, you can fetch emails by thread. You can get text snippets of emails for preview. JMAP can also automatically convert any email into directly renderable HTML (or plain text).
I’m convinced if nothing else the jmap json format is what everyone should be using for passing around email objects since it’s so well designed and feature rich. Almost all hand rolled email json formats throw away data you really want when rendering or processing email messages.
I tried using the JMAP bridge to develop a modern client as you mention, but there were huge problems with it. It appears to be abandoned, and Fastmail’s demo install of it is entirely broken too.
I ended up using the underlying lib that this project uses (also by andris9) and have had basically no problems whatsoever, it was a night and day difference.
The existing JMAP bridge is broken. But it would cool if 'IMAP API' used JMAP instead of coming up with its own protocol. (Which covers a very similar feature set than JMAP)
This would allow you to use the api with any JMAP client like Ltt.rs for example.
Yes and no. Politics has both procedural and substantive aspects. A company choosing not to participate in politics is taking a stand about the appropriate scope of political advocacy—where, when, and how politics should play a role in society.
Companies not choosing to participate in politics is not, as some urge, de facto support of the status quo. It’s quite possible that e.g. Twitter taking a stand on some issue actually sets things back, by creating a stronger opposition.
We're kind of collapsing "politics" down a little far, right? There's "not taking a stand on the capital gains rate", and then there's "not taking a stand on whether Black people are actual people". I understand the former more than the latter. There's a line to be drawn somewhere, right? At some point on the line where you draw it, your company is IG Farben.
Politics isn’t binary. “Whether or not black people are actual people” isn’t really what’s on the table: How many black people rolled their eyes when companies released statements in support of Black Lives Matter but did nothing inside their companies to change the actual lives of black people.
Yes, since you cannot not participate in politics in reality. What you can do is not participate in active politics if you are happy with the status quo.
What is far more popular is hiding your politics behind some more lofty words (like the linked article by the Coinbase CEO trying to hide his personal politics that "economic freedom" is the most important thing behind 'this is not politics' and 'this is our company mission').
There are reasons for not bringing politics into workplace other than "I support status quo". Such as wanting to get some work done, or being tired of endlessly debating the same things over and over again. (Or not wanting to get fired if it turns out that your opinion is somehow different from the majority, even if it does not support the status quo. There are more than two possible opinions.)
By similar logic, if you are not arguing about politics 24 hours a day, you spend the rest of your time defending status quo. Would you agree that this is a fair description of the moments you don't spend talking politics?
Is it, though? Because I see tremendous amount of virtue signalling in today's corporations, including Bay Area ones. How many social media woke campaigns? How many TV ads?
What's truly radical (and beneficial) today is what Coinbase is doing. And yes, Coinbase CEO is enacting a political approach (leave politics for your spare time), so employees are not compelled to do it by mob mentality.
I strongly disagree with this statement. A corporation (despite our current legal definition in the US) is not a person, and therefore shouldn't take sides in political matters, nor should it's representatives make overt political statements as though the company is a monolith. Companies are made up of people, and as individuals on their personal time and without conveying themselves as representatives of the company, should be able to to engage in politics.
If Silicon Valley executives are now going to be the arbiters of all that is good, we are in for a load of trouble. At best it's cringeworthy, at worst it's a load of limousine liberals wagging their fingers at the rest of us from their ivory towers.
"not participating in politics" is impossible, like another person in the thread stated[0], so simply not taking a side is taking a side, such as when deciding if your employees must wear a mask during work or if they can choose not to.
But it actually does, and there is a lot of data to prove it. When you have a big project and a bunch of teams, the first thing you build is boundaries / walls. Then you get to defining interfaces between interdependent services. And this frees them up to get hacking on their modules in parallel - without stepping on each others' toes. Communication would have definitely helped, but it is way easier for smaller teams to own and operate their services and try to get a big organization plough through a big mess.
That said, microservices are just one way to solve a problem, and not always the right way. But there is always a place where you would look at the problem, the organization that is tasked to solve it, and it would fit just right in.