Posts Tagged ‘InfrastructureAsCode’
[DevoxxBE2025] Not Just Code: Abusing Claude Code for Non-Coding Tasks
Lecturer
Barry van Someren operates a compact DevOps hosting and consulting enterprise named CoffeeSprout ICT Services. Previously engaged as a dedicated Java programmer, he now oversees Java-based systems and develops in-house solutions. Barry positions himself as an expert in averting common operational pitfalls such as memory exhaustion or storage shortages.
Abstract
This article scrutinizes the unconventional deployment of Claude Code, an AI-driven coding aide, in domains extending far beyond software creation. It probes into Barry’s methodologies for leveraging the tool in operational duties, infrastructure orchestration, and ad hoc automations, grounded in tangible scenarios. The examination encompasses the inception of these applications, practical executions, triumphs alongside mishaps, and ramifications for forthcoming AI-facilitated workflows in DevOps landscapes.
Inception and Justification for Extended Applications
The genesis of employing Claude Code for purposes unrelated to programming emerged from routine engagements with large language models in configuration oversight. Barry initially harnessed these models to craft Ansible playbooks, a YAML-centric framework for delineating system states. Ansible facilitates the depiction of desired configurations, enabling automated enforcement across servers. During one such interaction, the model proposed executing a command to ascertain a file path, sparking the realization that Claude could transcend mere suggestion to active participation in debugging and setup on development platforms.
This pivot stems from the acknowledgment that numerous operational elements mirror code structures. Infrastructure configurations, for instance, can be codified, while fleeting assignments may not warrant full-fledged scripting. Recurring chores often reveal themselves post hoc, prompting Barry to instruct Claude to formulate reusable scripts after task completion. Notably, this approach eschews intricate prompt crafting; initiating a dialogue within Claude’s interface, refining directives iteratively, suffices for efficacious outcomes.
Furthermore, the rationale hinges on friction reduction in learning novel utilities. Barry recounts configuring a rudimentary virtual machine, where Claude undertook preparatory steps, thereby expediting assimilation of unfamiliar technologies. This proves particularly advantageous in conference settings like Devoxx, where novel concepts abound, allowing practitioners to experiment swiftly without exhaustive manual setup.
Claude Code’s allure lies in its subscription framework, mitigating earlier credit-based expenditures that could escalate to substantial sums daily. The advent of affordable plans democratizes access, rendering it viable for exploratory uses. Its acumen in encoding and tool proficiency outpaces contemporaries, although rivals like ChatGPT’s Codex narrow the disparity. Consequently, Barry advocates for its adoption in streamlining DevOps, transforming mundane operations into efficient processes.
Methodological Executions and Illustrative Cases
Barry’s technique involves granting Claude terminal access within controlled environs, such as virtual machines or containers, to execute commands and scripts. This necessitates safeguards: employing disposable instances, restricting privileges via non-root users, and isolating sensitive data. For demonstration, he configures a Spring Pet Clinic application on Ubuntu, commencing with package updates and Java installation.
In one instance, Claude autonomously installs PostgreSQL, initializes a database, and integrates it with the application by modifying configuration files. It generates passwords—albeit simplistic ones—and applies them consistently, showcasing its aptitude for cross-file correlation. Another example entails heap analysis on a Java application; Claude employs jmap to capture heap dumps, analyzes them with jhat, and identifies memory leaks, all while navigating command-line intricacies.
A compliance scenario highlights versatility: adhering to energy conservation regulations, Claude devises scripts to throttle CPU frequencies during off-hours, generates audit logs, and verifies adherence, yielding a 15% reduction in power consumption. Similarly, it processes Excel sheets to execute scripts per user, excluding managerial roles, demonstrating data handling prowess.
These cases underscore repeatability without elaborate guidance. Barry emphasizes commencing with explicit plans, segmenting tasks, and verifying outputs. For Git repositories, Claude clones projects, inspects commit histories, and pinpoints version-specific issues. In Kubernetes contexts, it traverses namespaces, scrutinizes deployments, and peruses pod logs expeditiously.
However, executions demand vigilance. Barry recounts an episode where Claude rebooted a machine prematurely, failing to update boot configurations correctly, underscoring the imperative for output scrutiny. Nonetheless, the tool’s self-correction upon feedback enhances reliability.
Evaluation of Outcomes and Derived Insights
Assessing these applications reveals both efficacies and deficiencies. Successes include adept repository analysis, where Claude discerned alterations across versions, aiding troubleshooting. Its proficiency in interlinking configurations—such as database credentials in application properties—proves invaluable for intricate setups. Moreover, it accelerates tool acquisition, beneficial for client engagements involving novel technologies.
In Kubernetes diagnostics, Claude’s rapid log inspection outpaces manual efforts, facilitating swift resolutions. Log analysis on sanitized files identifies anomalies effectively, while test data generation populates schemas comprehensively. One-off automations address procrastinated tasks, and local container setups streamline development without advanced frameworks.
Conversely, pitfalls abound. Premature completion declarations necessitate clear doneness criteria and measurable objectives. Reading comprehension lapses, as in the misinterpretation of grub update outputs, mimic human errors but require intervention. Context exhaustion precipitates erratic behavior, mandating task fragmentation.
Barry advises defining scopes meticulously, verifying successes, and managing contexts to avert spirals. Despite these, the tool’s utility in DevOps outweighs risks when confined to non-production realms.
Ramifications and Prospective Trajectories
The implications extend to redefining DevOps workflows, where AI aides like Claude diminish manual toil, permitting focus on strategic endeavors. This fosters agility, particularly in compliance and reporting, where generated artifacts ensure regulatory adherence efficiently.
Looking ahead, the convergence of open-source models like Mistral with frontier capabilities portends broader accessibility. Barry speculates that simpler deployments may soon operate on local models, reducing dependency on proprietary services. Tools like Aider, permitting model selection, herald this shift.
In essence, Claude Code’s repurposing exemplifies AI’s potential in operational spheres, promoting efficiency while necessitating prudent governance. As models evolve, their integration into daily practices promises transformative, albeit cautious, advancements in technology management.
Links:
- Lecture video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nPoC6m3axeU
- Barry van Someren on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/barryvansomeren
- Barry van Someren on Twitter/X: https://twitter.com/bvansomeren
- CoffeeSprout ICT Services website: https://www.coffeesprout.nl/
[GopherConUK2025] How Just Eat Uses Tooling to Deploy Go Micro-services in Minutes
Lecturer
Ainsley Clark is a Senior Software Engineer at Just Eat, working within the Jet Connect team. He has been with the organisation for just over two years and maintains a strong professional focus on Go. His work centres on the design and operation of the internal microservice development toolkit that underpins large-scale order and menu processing across hundreds of partner integrations.
Abstract
This article describes the evolution and capabilities of GoKit, the internal microservice development toolkit developed by Just Eat’s Jet Connect team. Confronted with the maintenance burden of hundreds of independently forked services, the team replaced a template-based approach with a centralised code-generation and infrastructure-as-code system. The resulting tool scaffolds services, generates event consumers and producers, provisions cloud resources, produces continuous-integration workflows and emits operational metrics with minimal engineer effort. A concrete pizza-order example illustrates how a fully instrumented, event-driven service can be created and extended in minutes rather than days, allowing engineers to concentrate on business logic rather than infrastructure boilerplate.
From Monolith and Templates to a Centralised Toolkit
Jet Connect began life as Flight, an integration platform founded in 2013. Its purpose is to unify order and menu processing across restaurants, groceries and electronics partners so that a single point-of-sale interaction replaces multiple device-specific payloads. Today the platform serves approximately 731 000 partners across seventeen countries and processes hundreds of millions of orders annually. The Jet Connect engineering group itself comprises roughly fifty people and owns more than one hundred Go microservices.
The journey to that estate began with a PHP monolith that became increasingly difficult to change. Integrations were subsequently extracted into TypeScript services that spoke gRPC to the monolith. A GitHub template repository accelerated the creation of new integrations: an engineer could fork the template and obtain environment files, Helm charts and build workflows in minutes. The approach delivered speed in the early days yet exacted a heavy maintenance cost. A bug fix or standardisation change had to be applied manually to every fork. Inconsistent folder structures and coding patterns made context-switching expensive. End-to-end testing was absent, reducing confidence in releases.
The decision was therefore taken to move the entire integration layer to Go and to replace the template model with a purpose-built toolkit. The requirements were exacting: generate or update a repository in seconds; treat OpenAPI documentation as a first-class artefact; allow an engineer to subscribe to events by writing only a handler; hide infrastructure details such as databases, event buses and object storage; auto-generate continuous-integration and continuous-delivery pipelines; guarantee safe production deployment on merge to main; support capability testing across the full service graph; and provide a consistent local development experience with minimal setup. The resulting system is known internally as GoKit.
Scaffolding, Event Handling and Infrastructure as Code
GoKit meets those requirements through a combination of code generation and a declarative service description. The command gokit new <service-name> presents a short interactive questionnaire: does the service consume events, produce events, expose an HTTP server, require a database or object store? On the basis of the answers it scaffolds a consistent folder structure whose most important directories are cmd/app (containing a generated main) and internal (the sole location for custom business logic). A file named service.json acts as the single source of truth for infrastructure; it is consumed by Terraform templates that provision the necessary cloud resources.
A typical event handler receives an HTTP client, an event-bus producer and the incoming event (typed via reflection performed by GoKit). After performing domain work—calling a partner API, writing analytics, storing a payload—the handler emits a successor event. Registration consists of a single method call that associates the handler with a concrete event type. A subsequent gokit update rewrites service.json, updates generated code and refreshes documentation. The resulting README lists every consumed and produced topic, giving any engineer an immediate, accurate overview of the service’s responsibilities without requiring manual documentation effort.
Because the same service.json also drives resource provisioning, adding a DynamoDB table or an S3 bucket is a matter of inserting a few lines of JSON and re-running the update command. Generated interfaces for read/write operations and object-store upload/download encourage dependency injection and make unit testing straightforward. Should the underlying technology later change (for example from DynamoDB to PostgreSQL), only the implementation behind the interface needs to be altered; every consuming service continues to compile and run unchanged. The same mechanism supports vertical and horizontal scaling declarations—minimum replica counts, CPU and memory class—again expressed as simple keys in service.json.
Continuous Integration, Capability Testing and Observability
All continuous-integration workflows are themselves generated by GoKit. A change to a workflow template is made once in the central repository; every service inherits the update the next time gokit update is run. Capability tests spin up the entire relevant service graph under Docker, inject a correlation identifier into every request and event, and assert final outcomes. The approach scales to capability chains that involve ten or twenty intermediate services and provides high confidence before production deployment. Drift detection prevents accidental divergence: if an engineer edits a generated file without running the update command, continuous integration fails the pull request. Version pinning of GoKit itself ensures that services cannot merge while they lag behind a required toolkit version, producing a natural, incremental migration path across the estate.
Operational metrics appear automatically. Grafana dashboards display event rates, HTTP status codes, latency distributions, DynamoDB read/write performance and S3 operation counts without any additional instrumentation code. The same consistency that simplifies development also simplifies observation. When a product request arrives for analytics storage or an order-ready notification endpoint, the engineer adds a handful of lines to service.json or an OpenAPI specification, runs the update command, implements a short handler, and obtains a fully instrumented, tested and documented service ready for review.
Outcomes and Lessons
In the six years of its existence GoKit has allowed the Jet Connect team to update the entire service estate with a single pull request, to maintain uniform folder structures that eliminate costly context switches, and to keep documentation accurate without manual effort. Engineers spend their time on business problems—partner-specific payloads, analytics requirements, notification flows—rather than on Terraform, Helm or continuous-integration boilerplate. The toolkit has been instrumental in scaling the platform to hundreds of millions of orders while keeping the cognitive load on individual developers manageable.
The most transferable lessons are structural rather than technological. A single source of truth for service shape, aggressive code generation of repetitive artefacts, enforcement of consistency through continuous integration, and the deliberate abstraction of infrastructure behind stable interfaces together convert the chronic maintenance burden of a large microservice estate into a manageable, largely automated background process. The result is that complex event-driven workflows can be designed, implemented, tested and deployed in minutes rather than days, freeing engineering capacity for the differentiated work that actually delivers value to partners and customers.
The pizza-service walkthrough, though simplified for presentation, captures the essential rhythm of day-to-day work. An engineer begins with a short questionnaire, receives a fully structured repository, writes a handful of domain-specific lines, runs an update command, and obtains a service that already possesses continuous-integration pipelines, infrastructure declarations, metrics dashboards and capability-test scaffolding. Subsequent product requests—analytics storage, partner callbacks, new event types—are accommodated by small, localised edits rather than by the recreation of entire deployment artefacts. The cognitive load remains focused on the business problem; the mechanical work of packaging, provisioning and observing has been systematically removed from the critical path.
The same pattern scales. Whether the service handles a single partner’s CSV feed or participates in a multi-stage order-reconciliation flow involving a dozen intermediate services, the surrounding machinery remains identical. Consistency of structure, generation of repetitive artefacts and enforcement of hygiene through continuous integration together produce an estate that can grow without a proportional increase in operational friction. That is the practical payoff of the investment in a centralised toolkit.
Looking ahead, the same principles that make GoKit effective inside Just Eat are portable to any organisation that maintains a large collection of similarly structured services. The precise implementation will differ—different cloud providers, different event buses, different continuous-integration systems—but the underlying ideas remain constant: centralise the definition of service shape, generate everything that can be generated, enforce consistency automatically, and keep the engineer’s attention on the business problem. When those ideas are applied with discipline, the cost of creating and operating microservices falls dramatically, and the organisation’s capacity to respond to new partner or product requirements rises correspondingly.
In the end the value of a toolkit such as GoKit is measured less by the number of lines it generates than by the number of decisions it removes from the critical path of feature delivery. Every database, every topic subscription, every continuous-integration step that an engineer no longer has to configure by hand is a unit of attention that can be redirected toward the unique requirements of a partner or a product. When that redirection is systematic and reliable, the organisation as a whole becomes more responsive, more consistent and more capable of sustaining growth without a proportional increase in operational complexity.
The pizza-service narrative also illustrates a secondary benefit that is easy to overlook: the progressive enrichment of operational visibility. Because metrics, dashboards and capability tests are generated rather than hand-crafted, every new service automatically participates in the organisation’s observability and quality regimes. There is no opportunity for a service to be “forgotten” or to ship without the standard instrumentation. Consistency of tooling produces consistency of operational posture, which in turn reduces the cognitive load on both developers and on-call engineers.
Taken together, the practices embodied in GoKit demonstrate that the apparent tension between rapid delivery and long-term maintainability can be resolved by investing in the right abstractions at the platform level. When the platform absorbs the repetitive work of scaffolding, provisioning, testing and observing, individual service teams are free to move quickly without accumulating the structural debt that eventually slows every organisation that scales through pure copy-and-paste. The result is an engineering culture that can sustain high throughput while preserving the coherence and reliability required for a production system that processes hundreds of millions of orders.
The same principles that enabled Jet Connect to move from a maintenance-heavy template model to a coherent, generated estate are available to any organisation facing a similar proliferation of services. The precise technology choices—Terraform versus another infrastructure-as-code system, Kafka versus another event bus, OpenAPI versus another interface description—matter less than the architectural decision to centralise the definition of service shape and to generate the repetitive surrounding machinery. Once that decision is made and enforced, the cost of each additional service falls and the organisation’s ability to respond to new requirements rises. In an environment that processes hundreds of millions of orders, that difference is decisive.
In practical terms the toolkit converts what would otherwise be a multi-day or multi-week effort—creating a repository, wiring continuous integration, declaring infrastructure, adding metrics, writing documentation—into a sequence of minutes. The engineer’s attention remains on the unique aspects of the partner integration or the product feature. Everything else is supplied by generation and enforced by pipeline. That separation of concerns is the essential achievement, and it is the reason the platform can continue to scale without a corresponding explosion in operational overhead.
The experience of Jet Connect demonstrates that the investment in a carefully designed internal platform pays continuing dividends. Each new service inherits the accumulated learning of the entire estate; each improvement to the toolkit propagates automatically; each engineer inherits a consistent, well-instrumented starting point. The result is not merely faster delivery of individual features but a durable increase in the organisation’s capacity to absorb complexity without sacrificing reliability or developer effectiveness.
In short, GoKit is less a code generator than a deliberate architectural intervention that realigns incentives and removes friction from the path of delivery.
Links:
[NodeCongress2021] Infrastructure as Code with a Node Focus – Tejas Kumar
Infrastructure as code (IaC) reimagines cloud provisioning as programmable artifacts, sidestepping manual drudgery for reproducible orchestration. Tejas Kumar, from G2i, spotlights this paradigm through a Node.js lens, particularly serverless stacks, advocating IaC’s collaborative potency in fostering velocity without opacity.
Tejas frames infrastructure broadly—from servers to CDNs—noting traditional GUI/CLIs’ pitfalls: non-versioned tweaks, manual sprawl, and siloed knowledge. IaC counters with textual manifests, git-checkable and diffable, enabling state snapshots akin to React’s reconciliation.
Embracing Terraform for Node.js Workflows
Terraform, HashiCorp’s declarative engine, shines for its provider-agnosticism, though Tejas demos AWS Lambda via HCL. A nascent function—invoking Puppeteer for screenshots—evolves: outputs expose ARNs, inputs parameterize runtimes.
Scaling introduces necessities: API Gateways proxy requests, integrations bridge methods to Lambdas, deployments stage changes. Tejas’s script weaves resources—REST APIs, paths proxying /{proxy+}, permissions invoking functions—culminating in endpoints serving dynamic images, like NodeCongress.com captures.
Apply commands enact diffs surgically: eight additions manifest sans recreating existents, yielding invocable URLs. Destruction symmetrizes, underscoring ephemerality’s purity.
Key Principles for IaC Adoption
Tejas distills wisdom: mechanize over manual for iterability; ephemeral over eternal to evade corruption; repeatable over rare for testability; transparent over turbid for team synergy. In Node.js contexts, IaC unifies app-infra pipelines, amplifying open-source virtues in scalable, auditable deployments.
Links:
[NodeCongress2021] Introduction to the AWS CDK: Infrastructure as Node – Colin Ihrig
In the evolving landscape of cloud computing, developers increasingly seek tools that bridge the gap between application logic and underlying infrastructure. Colin Ihrig’s exploration of the AWS Cloud Development Kit (CDK) offers a compelling entry point into this domain, emphasizing how Node.js enthusiasts can harness familiar programming paradigms to orchestrate cloud resources seamlessly. By transforming abstract infrastructure concepts into executable code, the CDK empowers teams to move beyond cumbersome templates, fostering agility in deployment pipelines.
The CDK stands out as an AWS-centric framework for infrastructure as code, akin to established solutions like Terraform but tailored for those versed in high-level languages. Supporting JavaScript, TypeScript, Python, Java, and C#, it abstracts the intricacies of CloudFormation—the AWS service for defining and provisioning resources via JSON or YAML—into intuitive, object-oriented constructs. This abstraction not only simplifies the creation of scalable stacks but also preserves CloudFormation’s core advantages, such as consistent deployments and drift detection, where configurations are automatically reconciled with actual states.
Streamlining Cloud Architecture with Node.js Constructs
At its core, the CDK operates through a hierarchy of reusable building blocks called constructs, which encapsulate AWS services like S3 buckets, Lambda functions, or EC2 instances. Colin illustrates this with a straightforward Node.js example: instantiating a basic S3 bucket involves minimal lines of code, contrasting sharply with the verbose CloudFormation equivalents that often span pages. This approach leverages Node.js’s event-driven nature, allowing developers to define dependencies declaratively while integrating seamlessly with existing application codebases.
One of the CDK’s strengths lies in its synthesis process, where high-level definitions compile into CloudFormation templates during the “synth” phase. This generated assembly includes not just templates but also ancillary artifacts, such as bundled Docker images for Lambda deployments. For Node.js practitioners, this means unit testing infrastructure alongside application logic—employing Jest for snapshot validation of synthesized outputs—without ever leaving the familiar ecosystem. Colin’s demonstration underscores how such integration reduces context-switching, enabling rapid iteration on cloud-native designs like serverless APIs or data pipelines.
Moreover, the CDK’s asset management handles local files and images destined for S3 or ECR, necessitating a one-time bootstrapping per environment. This setup deploys a dedicated toolkit stack, complete with storage buckets and IAM roles, ensuring secure asset uploads. While incurring nominal AWS charges, it streamlines workflows, as evidenced by Colin’s walkthrough of provisioning a static website: a few constructs deploy a public-read bucket, sync local assets, and expose the site via a custom domain—potentially augmented with Route 53 for DNS or CloudFront for edge caching.
Navigating Deployment Cycles and Best Practices
Deployment via the CDK CLI mirrors npm workflows, with commands like “cdk deploy” orchestrating updates intelligently, applying only deltas to minimize disruption. Colin highlights the CLI’s versatility—listing stacks with “cdk ls,” diffing changes via “cdk diff,” or injecting runtime context for dynamic configurations—positioning it as an extension of Node.js tooling. For cleanup, “cdk destroy” reverses provisions, though manual verification in the AWS console is advisable, given occasional bootstrap remnants.
Colin wraps by addressing adoption barriers, noting the CDK’s maturity since its 2019 general availability and its freedom from vendor lock-in—given AWS’s ubiquity among cloud-native developers. Drawing from a Cloud Native Computing Foundation survey, he points to JavaScript’s dominance in server-side environments and AWS’s 62% market share, arguing that the CDK aligns perfectly with Node.js’s ethos of unified tooling across frontend, backend, and operations.
Through these insights, Colin not only demystifies infrastructure provisioning but also inspires Node.js developers to embrace declarative coding for resilient, observable systems. Whether scaling monoliths to microservices or experimenting with ephemeral environments, the CDK emerges as a pivotal ally in modern cloud engineering.
Links:
[KotlinConf2019] Kotless: A Kotlin-Native Approach to Serverless with Vladislav Tankov
Serverless computing has revolutionized how applications are deployed and scaled, but it often comes with its own set of complexities, including managing deployment DSLs like Terraform or CloudFormation. Vladislav Tankov, then a Software Developer at JetBrains, introduced Kotless at KotlinConf 2019 as a Kotlin Serverless Framework designed to simplify this landscape. Kotless aims to eliminate the need for external deployment DSLs by allowing developers to define serverless applications—including REST APIs and event handling—directly within their Kotlin code using familiar annotations. The project can be found on GitHub at github.com/JetBrains/kotless.
Vladislav’s presentation provided an overview of the Kotless Client API, demonstrated its use with a simple example, and delved into the architecture and design concepts behind its code-to-deployment pipeline. The core promise of Kotless is to make serverless computations easily understandable for anyone familiar with event-based architectures, particularly those comfortable with JAX-RS-like annotations.
Simplifying Serverless Deployment with Kotlin Annotations
The primary innovation of Kotless, as highlighted by Vladislav Tankov, is its ability to interpret Kotlin code and annotations to automatically generate the necessary deployment configurations for cloud providers like AWS (initially). Instead of writing separate configuration files in YAML or other DSLs, developers can define their serverless functions, API gateways, permissions, and scheduled events using Kotlin annotations directly on their functions and classes.
For example, creating a REST API endpoint could be as simple as annotating a Kotlin function with @Get("/mypath"). Kotless then parses these annotations during the build process and generates the required infrastructure definitions, deploys the lambdas, and configures the API Gateway. This approach significantly reduces boilerplate and the cognitive load associated with learning and maintaining separate infrastructure-as-code tools. Vladislav emphasized that a developer only needs familiarity with these annotations to create and deploy a serverless REST API application.
Architecture and Code-to-Deployment Pipeline
Vladislav Tankov provided insights into the inner workings of Kotless, explaining its architecture and the pipeline that transforms Kotlin code into a deployed serverless application. This process generally involves:
1. Annotation Processing: During compilation, Kotless processes the special annotations in the Kotlin code to understand the desired serverless architecture (e.g., API routes, event triggers, scheduled tasks).
2. Terraform Generation (Initially): Kotless then generates the necessary infrastructure-as-code configurations (initially using Terraform as a backend for AWS) based on these processed annotations. This includes defining Lambda functions, API Gateway resources, IAM roles, and event source mappings.
3. Deployment: Kotless handles the deployment of these generated configurations and the application code to the target cloud provider.
He also touched upon optimizations built into Kotless, such as “outer warming” of lambdas to reduce cold starts and optimizing lambdas by size. This focus on performance and ease of use is central to Kotless’s philosophy. The framework aims to abstract away the underlying complexities of serverless platforms, allowing developers to concentrate on their application logic.
Future Directions and Multiplatform Aspirations
Looking ahead, Vladislav Tankov discussed the future roadmap for Kotless, including ambitious plans for supporting Kotlin Multiplatform Projects (MPP). This would allow developers to choose different runtimes for their lambdas—JVM, JavaScript, or even Kotlin/Native—depending on the task and performance requirements. Supporting JavaScript lambdas, for example, could open up compatibility with platforms like Google Cloud Platform more broadly, which at the time had better support for JavaScript runtimes than JVM for serverless functions.
Other planned enhancements included extended event handling for custom events on AWS and other platforms, and continued work on performance optimizations. The vision for Kotless was to provide a comprehensive and flexible serverless solution for Kotlin developers, empowering them to build efficient and scalable cloud-native applications with minimal friction. Vladislav encouraged attendees to try Kotless and contribute to its development, positioning it as a community-driven effort to improve the Kotlin serverless experience.
Links:
[DevoxxFR2012] Nagios checks via NRPE
package “nagios-nrpe-server”
“`
He demonstrates real-time dashboards that correlate application metrics with infrastructure health, enabling rapid incident response and informed scaling decisions.
Economic and Organizational Impact: Beyond Technical Excellence
Bertrand Paquet concludes with a quantitative analysis of the pipeline’s impact: deployment frequency increased from weekly to multiple times daily, mean time to recovery decreased from hours to minutes, and infrastructure costs became predictable and scalable. He argues that these technical achievements enable organizational agility—new features can be tested in production with real users within hours of conception, creating tight feedback loops that drive product excellence.