32 ms·

in my eyes this is all madness. deploying sites via github to some docker shit. how about good old ftp and a cheap shared webhost? like its been done for 30 ye

in my eyes this is all madness. deploying sites via github to some docker shit. how about good old ftp and a cheap shared webhost? like its been done for 30 years.

api 6y ago
That doesn't have enough buzzwords.
- jrururufuf666 6y ago
  seems to me like some hipster wannabe hackers in need to inflate trivial tasks into rocket science
epmaybe 6y ago
To be honest, GitHub sites have been amazing for me. I just have a simple static website with personal information. HTML and CSS with minimal JS. Purchasing a shared webhost still means extra cost on top of domain registration. With GitHub, I just followed their instructions with my domain, and everything just worked. I'm also not paying anything per month or year besides domain registration which is really nice when you have to start budgeting tightly. I don't know about docker and all of that, though.
- gen3 6y ago
  It’s been awesome for me too. I’ve had a static site hosted on github since high school. It’s been a cheap way to host a website for free (I use github + cloudflare) since before I had a credit card. I’m willing to bet it helped me get at least one of my internships. It’s been a great way for me to learn, as I’ve re-written the site every 2 years or so.
- 1337shadow 6y ago
  With GitLab Pages it's even easier, just fork one of the examples in gitlab.com/pages, push a content update in a commit and it's online a minute later thanks to GitLab-CI and GitLab Pages.
  - epmaybe 6y ago
    This workflow seems almost exactly the same as GitHub Pages, I'm not sure it's worth my time to switch platforms and go through the hassle when everything works now.
sh87 6y ago
Yeah but...but... that would just get the job done. Nothing to write about, nothing to whine about, no weird dependencies being pulled, nothing to hand-wave, nothing to yell and humblebrag about. No theatre. You are right, this IS madness.
onion2k 6y ago
I've only been doing it for 25 years rather than the full 30 but in my noob opinion I'll take Docker and Github over it every time. The number of times a site failed to update because an FTP file failed to transfer completely, or that the permissions were wrong, or that the FTP client changed a file's CRLFs, or that a directory on the server wasn't writable by the FTP user, or... well, let's just admit that FTP sucked and things are far more reliable now.
- hombre_fatal 6y ago
  When I think of FTP, I'm reminded of chmod'ing 777 until everything worked.
quadrifoliate 6y ago
If there's a blog post: "I got my Ford F-350 to use less fuel by using this One Weird Trick", it's not much use to say how a Honda Civic is a much more simple and efficient solution to the given problem; the domain has already been defined to be the complicated solution. I'd probably choose the sftp and webhost route myself, but you know.

in my eyes this is all madness. deploying sites via github to some docker shit. how about good old ftp and a cheap shared webhost? like its been done for 30 years.

api 6y ago

That doesn't have enough buzzwords.

jrururufuf666 6y ago
seems to me like some hipster wannabe hackers in need to inflate trivial tasks into rocket science

epmaybe 6y ago

To be honest, GitHub sites have been amazing for me. I just have a simple static website with personal information. HTML and CSS with minimal JS. Purchasing a shared webhost still means extra cost on top of domain registration. With GitHub, I just followed their instructions with my domain, and everything just worked. I'm also not paying anything per month or year besides domain registration which is really nice when you have to start budgeting tightly. I don't know about docker and all of that, though.

gen3 6y ago
It’s been awesome for me too. I’ve had a static site hosted on github since high school. It’s been a cheap way to host a website for free (I use github + cloudflare) since before I had a credit card. I’m willing to bet it helped me get at least one of my internships. It’s been a great way for me to learn, as I’ve re-written the site every 2 years or so.
1337shadow 6y ago
With GitLab Pages it's even easier, just fork one of the examples in gitlab.com/pages, push a content update in a commit and it's online a minute later thanks to GitLab-CI and GitLab Pages.
- epmaybe 6y ago
  This workflow seems almost exactly the same as GitHub Pages, I'm not sure it's worth my time to switch platforms and go through the hassle when everything works now.

sh87 6y ago

Yeah but...but... that would just get the job done. Nothing to write about, nothing to whine about, no weird dependencies being pulled, nothing to hand-wave, nothing to yell and humblebrag about. No theatre. You are right, this IS madness.

onion2k 6y ago

I've only been doing it for 25 years rather than the full 30 but in my noob opinion I'll take Docker and Github over it every time. The number of times a site failed to update because an FTP file failed to transfer completely, or that the permissions were wrong, or that the FTP client changed a file's CRLFs, or that a directory on the server wasn't writable by the FTP user, or... well, let's just admit that FTP sucked and things are far more reliable now.

hombre_fatal 6y ago
When I think of FTP, I'm reminded of chmod'ing 777 until everything worked.

quadrifoliate 6y ago

If there's a blog post: "I got my Ford F-350 to use less fuel by using this One Weird Trick", it's not much use to say how a Honda Civic is a much more simple and efficient solution to the given problem; the domain has already been defined to be the complicated solution. I'd probably choose the sftp and webhost route myself, but you know.