Forum Overview :: We Love Katamari :: There were some better comments upvoted after I posted.

[quote name="blackwater"]But the original batch of comments were entertainingly salty. [quote]fullstackchris 1 day ago [flagged] | prev | next [–] "don't build sites a complex way with FRAMEWORKS or LIBRARIES!" "instead, here's our way with a DIFFERENT set of frameworks and libraries!" ...you're kidding me right? reply [/quote] [quote]gerdesj 1 day ago [flagged] [dead] | parent | prev | next [–] breathe Why not go back and fix up formatting and grammar within your own post and then hit the reply button. I do have to agree with you somewhat, but please take it easy. I do note that this Koding Kitty blog entry comes across to me (personally) as utter wankery. For starters, my 53 year old eyes require CTRL + until 150%. "Too lazy to read?" <smol>fuck off</smol>. ... yep, triggered 8) "We don't need to store our content in a database. We don't need to deal with plugins. We don't need a visual editor to write our content." That's nice. I deployed Mediawiki with Visual Editor at work for our documentation needs and it has been wildly successful for us - https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Intranet I would never get MS Word addicts to use mark anything or whatevs. The VM is tiny. We have over two decades of docs in there and the MariaDB tables are 415MB, sorry that's the entire /var/lib/mysql directory, mediawiki DB is 224MB (just checked). There are a fair few additional files - pics etc. We have a full set of ISO 9000 and ISO 27000 docs in there so it is not a trivial store. [/quote] [quote]toddmorey 1 day ago | prev | next [–] I don’t get it. They didn’t want a static site generator so they wrote a static site generator. reply [/quote] [quote]vogre 1 day ago | prev | next [–] > Frameworks bad Yeah cool! >We use html and css sooo hip! >We use jinja wait.. what? >and self-made file-watching static generator that uses python and css-generator Are you kidding me? That's the real good case of NIH syndrome. reply [/quote] [quote]CodeWriter23 1 day ago | prev | next [–] Thank you, no reply [/quote] [quote]Uehreka 1 day ago | prev | next [–] I’m just really tired of this debate about “frameworks” and “complexity”. If your client asks you for a custom CMS with a multi-stage publishing workflow with i18n and regulation-compliant a11y, you’ll need high-powered tools to build it in the time clients expect. Lots of clients in enterprise are like this, which is why the demand for this stuff is so high. If you’re working in B2C this may be surprising, but this is what the underwater part of the tech industry iceberg is. Yes, a complicated Next.js setup or Vite toolchain isn’t necessary for a static blog. But the people who are talking seriously about these tools aren’t talking about making a simple blog site (even if that’s what their “reduced teaching case” tutorial is). So can we just chill with this framework hate? If you’ve got ideas for simple ways to make web sites, go ahead and publish tutorials, and if they’re appealing then people will start doing things your way where appropriate. But please don’t position yourself in opposition to a vague “spicy toolchains and trendy frameworks” enemy. reply[/quote] Gwern also made an actually good comment pointing out flaws in the original poster's site. To be fair, Gwern is some kind of actual savant who could probably point out flaws in anyone's site.[/quote]