This message was deleted.

I feel this sentiment deeply. At one job, we a set of tools we called the Platform, used by ~1000 developers. We used Backstage for the catalog and templates. What hurt us with adoption IMO was that the Platform looked different, depending on what team you were working on. It was almost too extensible and had too many choices, and teams embraced the freedom. Soon we had ECS, EKS, Lambdas, Fargate workloads. RDS, mongo, kinesis, you name it! We made it very easy to deploy applications and infrastructure as code. We didn't want to get in their way. That meant that every application looked different, despite it being on the same "Platform". Platform Engineering is loaded with intentions, assumptions, and combines best practices across a range of disciples. Engineers were right to assume we had included everything they would need without much configuration. They wanted a pluggable interface, a different one depending on language and storage and persistence needs. What they got was a box of parts. Parts that could build the perfect interface, sure, but a box of parts nonetheless. We forgot the "without much configuration" part. We forgot to build an interface and told developers to write their own