top | item 43807456 (no title) patwoz | 10 months ago How does Tilt compare to “skaffold dev“? We use skaffold exactly for that purpose. To develop within a the cluster. discuss order hn newest eats_indigo|10 months ago Migrated from Skaffold to Tilt at my last co, found it was much more easier to configure granular rebuild rules, which lead to faster dev loop cycles 3abiton|10 months ago Any catch? turtlebits|10 months ago Skaffold works but its DX is pretty poor. Too many knobs via yaml- tilt has just enough magic that it doesn't feel like a chore to setup local dev. cirego|10 months ago I've always appreciated that Tilt chose Starlark instead of YAML. Makes things so much cleaner! load replies (1) lima|10 months ago Much more flexible than Skaffold thanks to Starlark config vs. a rigid YAML structure. ajayvk|10 months ago Starlark does allow for much more concise and powerful config specification. I am building https://github.com/claceio/clace, which is an application server for teams to deploy internal tools.Clace uses Starlark for defining apps, instead of something like YAML. https://github.com/claceio/clace/blob/main/examples/utils.st... is a config file which defines around seven apps (apps are downloaded and deployed directly from git).Clace uses Starlark for defining app level routing rules also. This avoids the need to use a nginx like DSL for routing.
eats_indigo|10 months ago Migrated from Skaffold to Tilt at my last co, found it was much more easier to configure granular rebuild rules, which lead to faster dev loop cycles 3abiton|10 months ago Any catch?
turtlebits|10 months ago Skaffold works but its DX is pretty poor. Too many knobs via yaml- tilt has just enough magic that it doesn't feel like a chore to setup local dev. cirego|10 months ago I've always appreciated that Tilt chose Starlark instead of YAML. Makes things so much cleaner! load replies (1)
cirego|10 months ago I've always appreciated that Tilt chose Starlark instead of YAML. Makes things so much cleaner! load replies (1)
lima|10 months ago Much more flexible than Skaffold thanks to Starlark config vs. a rigid YAML structure. ajayvk|10 months ago Starlark does allow for much more concise and powerful config specification. I am building https://github.com/claceio/clace, which is an application server for teams to deploy internal tools.Clace uses Starlark for defining apps, instead of something like YAML. https://github.com/claceio/clace/blob/main/examples/utils.st... is a config file which defines around seven apps (apps are downloaded and deployed directly from git).Clace uses Starlark for defining app level routing rules also. This avoids the need to use a nginx like DSL for routing.
ajayvk|10 months ago Starlark does allow for much more concise and powerful config specification. I am building https://github.com/claceio/clace, which is an application server for teams to deploy internal tools.Clace uses Starlark for defining apps, instead of something like YAML. https://github.com/claceio/clace/blob/main/examples/utils.st... is a config file which defines around seven apps (apps are downloaded and deployed directly from git).Clace uses Starlark for defining app level routing rules also. This avoids the need to use a nginx like DSL for routing.
eats_indigo|10 months ago
3abiton|10 months ago
turtlebits|10 months ago
cirego|10 months ago
lima|10 months ago
ajayvk|10 months ago
Clace uses Starlark for defining apps, instead of something like YAML. https://github.com/claceio/clace/blob/main/examples/utils.st... is a config file which defines around seven apps (apps are downloaded and deployed directly from git).
Clace uses Starlark for defining app level routing rules also. This avoids the need to use a nginx like DSL for routing.