Personally moving away from IaC is a big yikes, for something so critical to my company no way would I let myself be locked into your product. I have already been bitten before when a developer productivity startup fails/pivots(as they often seem to do).

▲

holoway a day ago | parent [-]

That's cool. For what it's worth, the software is all open source, precisely because it's critical in this way. I realize that's like telling you that you can take care of this puppy yourself if you want. :)

Even if you don't move away from IaC, you can still get benefits from the approach by having SI discover the results, and then do analysis.

▲

lawnchair 12 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I noticed on your open source page it says:

> You can make a build that includes our trademarks to develop System Initiative software itself. You may not publish or share the build, and you may not use that build to run System Initiative software for any other purpose.

That feels a bit different from what many developers expect when they hear "open source." Nothing wrong with that, just pointing it out.

https://www.systeminit.com/open-source

▲

AOE9 a day ago | parent | prev [-]

Sorry maybe my last reply was a little harsh now I understand it isn't a priority IaC under the hood anymore.

I still have major reservations around dropping IaC and just working on a simulation of what is deployed, I don't see how this can work for more complex deployments such as multiple region/AZ deployments, blue/green deployments, cell based deployments etc etc. Seems like dropping IaC would only work for very simple environments.

	▲	holoway a day ago \| parent [-]
		It works great. If you think of it as 'dropping all the reasons we chose IaC', then yes - that's obviously dumb. If you think of it as 'getting all those benefits, plus faster feedback loops, AI agents, and an easier programming model' then.. not so much.