Though one can be of different opinions some of the good things provided by this framework are the ability to organize your project locally, abstract configuration, and deploy to different clouds from the command line.
The local development and testing paradigm is still rough and docs and examples are rather high level in many places.
It is also very much at the beginning stages with version 1.0 just about to be released. As such it has an enthusiastic crew with a lot of passion to push things forward. So, in short it is the new shiny thing that is cool and thus enjoys mindshare and interest.
In general that is a good thing. In particular, I can already see that there are cracks in the foundation. Two things in particular come to mind:
There is a sense of "we know better what you need" that permeates much of the later work on this framework. Whether it is through heavy configuration driven mechanisms in lieu of any convention elements or the careless breaking of implementation from earlier beta releases. For example, here is just a sprinkling of frameworks that believe in less configuration is better:
- Apache Maven
- Appcelerator's Titanium Alloy
- ASP.NET MVC
- ColdBox Platform
- Java Platform, Enterprise Edition
- Lift (web framework)
- Meteor (web framework)
- Play Framework
- Roxy rest-API
- Ruby on Rails
- Sails (web framework)
- Spring Framework
This does not appear to be relevant to the current team and my fear is that the shininess will not overcome the effort it takes to maintain this when an alternate framework emerges. Ignorance in this case is not bliss.
B) Ethics of Tracking
The framework uses automatic enabled tracking of usage data. To discover this you will need to dig deep into docs and code. I understand that this is anonymous, however, this is not the way to approach the issue. Take Apple's location tracking for example, it is anonymous as well. How good do you feel about it?
For me the issue is with the enabled by default attitude. It is the complete undermining of faith of the user community. I believe firmly that any company making the automatic assumption of collecting data about me is living on the edge of ethics. Rather than playing in the muck, I would like to encourage the team to elevate themselves from questionable practices. There is time, and there are better alternatives.
Yes, you can disable all this once you find out where in the documentation it is hidden and run the right commands. This is not the point. If you don't ask me assume that you should not do it.
Here is the disable command if you are looking for it (run against all instances and all machines that you own):
$ serverless tracking --disable
So in short, this framework has potential but it is sliding into the area of big, obtuse, and rather in-the-way-of-the-task with ethical dangerous undertones before even hitting version one. These are achievements we should not be proud off given the great promise that it has.
If you have a project that is small or medium sized there are alternatives that work equally well and don't involve you sharing your personal command history. You still get automation and deployment in place with full control. Look at connecting AWS Code Commit to Lambda through Continuous Integration Pipelines via CodePipeline. That is some sweet stuff.
I am planning on outlining how to do this in more detail in later posts.
I will also put some things on serverless how-tos as contrast. There is good stuff there so an eye should be kept on it.