octopod VS stan

In this post, I’d like to tell you how we use dynamic environments (review or preview environments) in our work here at Typeable, what issues we’ve managed to solve, and how and why we use our Octopod solution for these purposes instead of GitLab Dynamic Environments. In case you don’t know what the dynamic environment is, I recommend reading the post by Flant where the author gives a detailed account of the types of dynamic environments, their purpose and applications. The author also looks into this topic using GitLab as an example and provides detailed cases and descriptions. As for us, we use an alternative approach, somewhat different in terms of ideology, and work with review environments in Octopod. Previously we related the history of Octopod creation and the causes that motivated us to create it. We won’t repeat ourselves but will focus on the differences of our approach and the issues we’ve fixed.

Testing in staging environment by dedicated QA engineers (check out Octopod, our open-source solution for managing multiple deployments)

That sounds very interesting. Maybe it would not be very hard to implement a prototype of such a system with Stan?

Would you be okay if we add Soisy to the list of companies using stan?

However, I'm a huge fan of static tools like this in general. I've heard great things about https://package.elm-lang.org/packages/jfmengels/elm-review/latest/ and I need to try out https://github.com/kowainik/stan. Also its possible HLint has ways to write more advanced rules and I just don't know about them, but even if that's so hopefully I've explained why just dropping it in isn't a huge win.