This message was deleted.

Its a very very opinionated version of kubernetes paas full of redhatisms lol

For historical and diplomatic reasons I will refrain from comment 😇

@Hugo Pinheiro I really wonder how a product where devops complain about it keep getting used. I imagine there are at least a few positive points no?

Funny enough most of the complains are technically not about using the product but that its extremely hard to implement, most of them complain they engaged with Redhat and Redhat support is still trying to implement the system 😂, we do have to take in consideration most of these would be in big enterprises that have complicated environments though, personally I havent had good experience with RedHat things, I tend to always run into weird bugs that when going to look at the kb turn out because they backported their own thing into the linux kernel, I find Canonical tends to stay closer to upstream and is a bit more clean ( RedHat has the weight of IBM behind them though 😂 so they make more inroads into the enterprise )

It’s crazy because the Openshift promise is to turn operational costs low 😅 and simplify ops life. I think @Morgan Perry you’ll enjoy this thread

I don't use it daily, but I have implemented it for a few customers. OpenShift is fairly complicated overall (I can spin up a fully HA cluster in 10 minutes in a VM environment, or in the public cloud as well). The main issue though is that almost no one uses the features that RedHat provides. They typically want to integrate their third party products into it and build a frankenstein of a platform. I agree there needs to be time to migrate fully to all the features that OpenShift offers, but that is rarely something clients want to do. They are doing some exciting things with it though. Every distro of Kubernetes has bugs in it, just a mater of you hitting it or not. Their support is generally pretty good, but mainly when you have a high severity issue.

Thank you @Fred for your feedback 🙏

interesting discussion here 🙂