←back to thread

272 points abdisalan | 3 comments | | HN request time: 0.567s | source
Show context
mvkel ◴[] No.42175730[source]
> time to run it after not touching it for 4 years

> Two hours of my life gone...

Two hours of work after 4 years sounds ... perfectly acceptable?

And it would have run perfectly right away if the node version was specified, so a good learning, too

This feels like making a mountain out of a mole hill

replies(21): >>42175799 #>>42175818 #>>42175826 #>>42175846 #>>42176217 #>>42176305 #>>42176788 #>>42176958 #>>42181497 #>>42182299 #>>42182564 #>>42182778 #>>42183020 #>>42183093 #>>42183501 #>>42183725 #>>42184814 #>>42192770 #>>42193606 #>>42194518 #>>42211558 #
arp242 ◴[] No.42176217[source]
Well, the "solution" ended up as "I gave up and just installed an old Node version and called it a day". So those 2 hours weren't even enough.

I've been using Jekyll/Ruby since 2014 for my website, with a few custom plugins I wrote myself. And I've never really needed to do anything like this. It "just works".

My Go and C programs are the same: "just works". I have some that are close to a decade old.

replies(4): >>42176445 #>>42181328 #>>42181355 #>>42182182 #
pzmarzly ◴[] No.42181328[source]
Good for you, my experience with Jekyll is closer to OP's experience with Node. I have a big website that I built in 2014, with tons of custom plugins, that is now stuck on Jekyll 2.x and Ruby 2.x, and has a ton of hidden C++ dependencies. The way I build it now is using a Dockerfile with Ubuntu 18.04. I probably could update it given enough effort, but I was rather thinking of rewriting it in Astro.js or Next.js.
replies(3): >>42181523 #>>42182439 #>>42217665 #
1. ohthatsnotright ◴[] No.42182439[source]
If you're looking for a stable target you should not even consider Next.
replies(2): >>42183264 #>>42199817 #
2. ◴[] No.42183264[source]
3. jmathai ◴[] No.42199817[source]
Just avoid JavaScript frameworks altogether.