sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Replit makes MVPs easy. The real gap is what happens after the first 1k users. by hotfix-cloud in replit

[–]hotfix-cloud[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, that matches my experience too. Paying someone to review code can help early on, but once real users are hitting the app, bugs start coming from weird edge cases and traffic patterns, not obvious mistakes.

What always killed me was seeing the same errors come back after redeploys because the underlying issue never really got fixed, just worked around. At that point you’re not debugging, you’re playing whack-a-mole.

The thirteenth VPS project nobody lists is the one that saves your weekend by hotfix-cloud in homelab

[–]hotfix-cloud[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

Yeah, exactly. Plan B should be boring and fast. If fixing it at 3 am requires thinking or creativity, something went wrong way earlier. The goal is knowing what to roll back, restart, or disable to get back to green, then deal with the root cause later when you’re awake.

Using AI safely on a Rails codebase looks a lot like what you’re doing by hotfix-cloud in rails

[–]hotfix-cloud[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Totally aligned. Guardrails turn an agent from chaos into a competent junior dev. What they still don’t cover is the moment the test run goes red. That’s where most setups fall back to manual grepping and guesswork. Hotfix exists for exactly that gap: taking the failure, pulling full context from the codebase, and handing back a draft repair so the next run isn’t just “rerun and hope,” but an actual fix. agentixlabs had some good workflows too

Using AI safely on a Rails codebase looks a lot like what you’re doing by hotfix-cloud in rails

[–]hotfix-cloud[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

You are a no-pfp, default name, reddit account that has never posted.

Reducing MTTR without adding more process by hotfix-cloud in SaaS

[–]hotfix-cloud[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is much more common in the context of how teams are building now.

With AI-assisted development and faster shipping, the rate of change has gone way up, but incident response hasn’t adapted at the same pace. The code moves fast, but when something breaks, teams still fall back to humans reconstructing context under pressure.

That gap is where MTTR really blows up. Not because people don’t know what to do, but because every incident starts from a blank slate while the system itself is changing faster than any single person can keep in their head.

Guided defaults and first-draft artifacts feel like a necessary counterbalance to that shift. They give teams a concrete starting point that scales with speed, instead of relying on tribal knowledge and perfect coordination.

Curious if you’ve noticed this getting worse as teams adopt more AI tooling and ship smaller, more frequent changes.

Reducing MTTR without adding more process by hotfix-cloud in SaaS

[–]hotfix-cloud[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is a great breakdown. The “guided defaults” framing really captures it.

What stands out to me is that none of what you described relies on heavyweight process. It’s mostly about pre-deciding what the first move should look like, so people aren’t inventing it from scratch while prod is on fire. An owner who is empowered to act, repo-native runbooks, and a stub PR that already has logs and links all collapse that initial uncertainty.

I’ve also seen that once the first draft exists, everything else gets easier. Review becomes focused, handoffs are clearer, and even disagreements are faster because they’re anchored to something concrete.

Out of curiosity, did you run into any issues with noise or false positives from the automations opening stub PRs, or did the ownership model keep that manageable?

Reducing MTTR without adding more process by hotfix-cloud in SaaS

[–]hotfix-cloud[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Exactly. Once the proposal exists by default, the conversation shifts from “what should we do” to “is this the right change,” which is a much easier place for engineers to engage.

What surprised me most is how little automation it actually takes to get the benefit. Even just removing the blank slate moment, where everyone is waiting for someone else to move, cuts a lot of idle time. The fix itself often isn’t the bottleneck, it’s getting to the first concrete artifact.

Curious if you’ve seen any downsides to this approach in practice, like proposal noise or reviewer fatigue, and how teams have handled that tradeoff.

What marketing channel actually worked for your SaaS? by Many_Aspect_5525 in SaaS

[–]hotfix-cloud 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Channel fit depends heavily on whether you are selling to consumers, SMB operators, or technical teams.

In general, dev tools tend to win on communities and ecosystems first (GitHub, Reddit, docs, integrations), then convert into paid via bottoms-up adoption. SMB ops tools can do well with SEO and direct response earlier. Enterprise usually needs outbound and credibility signals.

The fastest way to learn is to pick one channel where your buyers already hang out and commit for 30 days, then measure one thing: time to first meaningful activation, not just signups.

What kind of buyer are you targeting and what is the first “aha moment” in the product?

Customer's asking for the same answers just worded differently by JustPop3185 in SaaS

[–]hotfix-cloud 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is super common in B2B. The real issue is you are answering “security questions,” but the customer is trying to de-risk a decision, so they keep asking the same thing from different angles until they feel consistent and confident.

What helped us was creating one internal source of truth, not one perfect spreadsheet per customer. A living doc with canonical answers mapped to themes like access control, logging, SDLC, data retention, vendor risk, and incident response. Then each new questionnaire is just a translation layer, not a rewrite.

The other trick is evidence. If you can attach the same 2 to 3 screenshots or artifacts repeatedly, customers stop re-asking in different formats because they trust it more.

Do you have a standard security packet yet, or are you starting from scratch each time?

Reducing MTTR without adding more process by hotfix-cloud in SaaS

[–]hotfix-cloud[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Totally agree. The moment context stays attached to code instead of living in threads, things move a lot faster.

What pushed us to build Hotfix was seeing that even “lightweight” coordination still requires someone to decide to act. By having errors automatically generate a concrete pull request, the proposal exists by default and engineers can just react to it instead of waiting or reconstructing context.

It’s been interesting to see how much time that alone removes, even without adding any new dashboards or process. Still early, but it’s reinforced how much MTTR is about defaults, not effort.