3 ms·
Is this something like putting it out of its mercy, removing your open support for bower because you hear it's dying?
by kakarot 10y ago
Is this something like putting it out of its mercy, removing your open support for bower because you hear it's dying?
- Kiro 10y agoTo be honest I tend to avoid packages that have bower support. It just gives me the feeling of legacy. It's unfounded, I know, but that's me.
- konradb 10y agoTo an old man out of the loop, what gives you a supported, future-looking feeling?
- izolate 10y agoPrecisely that. To in-the-loop JS developers, Bower is old news. To see Bower/Less/jQuery in 2016 conjures up images of out of touch backend developers living in 2011. There are better alternatives available (NPM/PostCSS/vanilla.js to the above)
- konradb 10y agojQuery to me has the same connotations but I was surprised by Bower. As an out-of-the-loop sometime JS developer what's respectable these days, npm/gulp/sass, vanilla.js/react/angular2?
- franciscop 10y agoBut bower came after NPM... Anyway, I didn't really intend this library to be in-the-loop. I just did it because I couldn't find one I liked in 2016. Which is just nuts on itself. so I went all old-school and tried to keep cross-browser support high and make it simple. It took an hour to be done and a couple of them to test and document it (plus another couple of them for small details such as CDN, bugs/patchs/small features).
- tracker1 10y agoTo me it's silly that bower requires npm.. so just use npm. Although you may or may not agree with npm's dependency resolution, I find it more silly to use a tool that requires another tool that does the same job... I prefer my screwdriver, that I have to open with another screwdriver.