tommy_mcclung

I'm going to do everything I can to not hire marketers who can't push to github.

That's exactly what we're doing next. Now that we have control over the content we're building some agents to promote and expand our reach with the content. It's all super easy and we're not sitting behind people that slow the process down.

They didn't have to transition. https://release.com is still alive and customers are happily using it.

It's not a "pivot" in the traditional sense. But yeah, building companies is probably one of the hardest things one can do. We still run https://release.com and https://release.ai is built on the same platform.

It would be hard to count. Basically every customer we had on Release 1.0 was an iteration towards this. If you go to https://release.com it's there and we have many happy customers using it. There are definitely challenges with that business, however, that made us look for easier ways to get people using the platform we had built. People looking to do ephemeral environments have a lift to move their environment definitions into Release and it's a work effort that needs prioritization. Release.ai is built on the same platform and because AI frameworks are more turn key than bespoke software stacks companies have been building on, we believe Release.ai will be easier to adopt. In the long run AI applications and traditional web applications are going to merge and we think we're the platform that will do that in the long run. Long story short, hundreds of iterations.

We might not have made it clear in the post how to signup for the sandbox. Just head to http://release.ai and click on "Start Free Trial".

Awesome feedback, thank you!!

Thanks for the feedback and I agree we need to do a better job messaging the value on the site. How would this have landed for you?

We are an AI orchestration platform that makes deploying open source models and frameworks using Kubernetes and docker simple. We manage the GPU and k8s resources, provide templates to common open source frameworks and an orchestration engine for your AI workflows.

Yeah, I hear you and the confusion. We decided on this as a management fee that only gets charged when you’re using the environment. It was the best tradeoff we could come up with but it definitely isn’t perfect. Any ideas on how we can make this clearer or better?

It's funny you ask this because this question has come up a bunch of times. It just maps to our mission and we decided we really wanted to be true to it. Our mission is to help people/companies release their ideas to the world quickly. So it just fit and we decided it was worth the tradeoff for it to be a little harder to search for. In the end if we're successful it will be because we built something people want (i.e. apple.com) vs the name we chose.

We have a way to connect data to an environment through workspaces. The docs are here: https://docs.release.com/reference-documentation/application...

Right now we support s3 and pulling in full github repos. Snowflake is on our roadmap and has been requested by some of our customers already.

We spend a ton of time working directly with DevOps teams of our customers, helping them in using Release, but also just a lot of questions related to their infrastructure and AWS/GCP. We have some crazy good Integration Engineers that field a lot of this and we thought maybe AI could help free them up and scale That’s what sent us down this path.

Of course. tommy@release.com

Love this.

Done

Tommy, CEO here. We also have some ideas on reporting hallucinations and feeding wrong answers back into the prompts automatically to help reduce instances of hallucinations. We have a few other ideas and would welcome any ideas folks have to help with this problem.

Tommy, CEO here. We believe it is incredibly complimentary to our core service. What we've found in building Release through our support channels is we spend a tremendous amount of time consulting with the DevOps teams of our customers answering questions like what can be answered with ReleaseAI. It helps us help ourselves and our customers. In the long run we see this being integrated into our core product in really interesting ways as well. There will always be a standalone version.

Internally developed, although we just started using an ATS and they had some of this included. Filled out post interview and then we have a person dedicated to running the follow-up meeting. Amazon style bar raiser.

As a hiring manager, I hate the subjective nature of the feedback process and collecting input from the interviewers. I wish there were a more data driven approach to this part of the process. Sitting in a room listening to everyone's opinions post interview is a lot of noise. We currently have a set of feedback forms/processes we use but it's still lacking.

I agree. We are mostly targeting startups that have been funded but for those that aren't and are interested we definitely find ways to make it work for them. Much like how larger companies offer credits for early stage companies we are capable of making it work for them.

Co-founder here. The basic premise is we price based on the type of environment, the number of environments and the number of services within the environment. The reason we took pricing off the site was because every company has a unique setup. When we did user research it was confusing presented as a big table with checkboxes. We decided that for now a quick chat to make sure we understand what's needed was the best way to communicate what it costs. But, the starting point is as around $1000/month if you have a modest setup. For most funded startups with a development team this is usually where they start. We're specifically targeting companies at the moment and not individual developers. We do have some plans to address that segment of the market but we've had to focus where there's an addressable opportunity for our size and scale. This is great feedback and we'll figure this out soon.

Hit me up at tommy@releasehub.com and I'll hook you up.

On our blog it has been pretty good to get newsletter signups. We tried just having a 'subscribe to our newsletter' section but no one filled that out. I moved it over to Intercom as an experiment and it actually worked. For our main site it's barely worth it... we get a few questions here and there.

That works for some use cases, but what I've found makes the best demo is to ask the potential customer what pain points they are experiencing and then I cater my demo exactly to their pain points. Making the demo interactive helps get the prospect to engage. When I get the customer talking it's amazing what they will tell you and the demo can take better shape.

Release founder here, Regis does a great job explaining what we're up to at Release in this podcast. We're looking to hire more great engineers like regis. https://releaseapp.io/company

Yeah, maybe I should have said, Reploy is going after the same problem in a similar way? I wasn’t trying to imply they copied what we are doing but the approach to solving the problem is very similar.

Thanks for the https://releaseapp.io shout out! Reploy looks like a copy of what we are doing. Game on.

Role is a Senior Software Engineer - Cloud Infrastructure. Here's more about it:

Release is looking for a Founding Member of the engineering team reporting directly to one of the co-founders.

This role will be responsible for developing software solutions in Rails around Docker, Kubernetes and cloud systems (starting with AWS). This position will also be responsible for interfacing with customers to help understand their systems and how to take their environments and deploy them onto the Release platform. A deep understanding of AWS API's, Kubernetes tools, Docker, Linux systems and able to write Go and/or Rails would be the ideal fit for this role.

I have a 15 year old and 13 year old at home, online with their friends basically passing the time in quarantine with Zoom on all day. I literally just told my 15 year old something like this needs to exist. Showing him now... he’s going to love it.

Thanks for the comment, I totally understand what you're saying. We need to do a better job of explaining that we can run production environments as well as staging. In fact, Release runs on Release.