3 ms·
I'm not entirely sure but I see this pop up a lot with webpack. Webpack is not inherently difficult to configure, it just requires you to read the documentation
by notus 8y ago
I'm not entirely sure but I see this pop up a lot with webpack. Webpack is not inherently difficult to configure, it just requires you to read the documentation. All these solutions are doing is adding what they feel are sane defaults to the webpack experience. I don't see how this would appeal to someone who knows webpack well. In my opinion these solutions are just intended for a minority of new developers. For anyone else they could roll out their own faster than they could learn how to use abstraction layers built around someone else's.
- ricardobeat 8y agoOn the other side, comments like yours also pop up with the same frequency. 'Just read the documentation', which sits at 50+ pages, does not make for a good developer experience. Projects like this are a symptom of the pain developers, new and old, feel when faced with a mountain of complexity just to get a module system and ES6 working on any small project.
- notus 8y agoI'm sorry but you should have a basic understanding of something before using it, that is just common sense.
- kn8 8y agoThing is, in my experience, the configuration can get quickly very difficult when the plugins don't play nice. It's not just webpack's configuration, it's also babel and babel-loader and postcss and postcss-loader and so on. Next thing you know, you're spending hours tweaking the config to get it to work. I wanted something that is a good fouondation for _any_ project. If it needs extending, sure. But there's not much to remove. You could argue you don't need all those plugins, but.. I would like to use jsx, async/await, css autoprefixing, css imports, hot reloading, compile it all for older browsers, split chunks and generate html. Those seem to be expected features today (or maybe that's a wrong assumption I have)?