3 ms·
Caddy underwent a complete rewrite that also invalidated most of the existing config. Personally I don't see any benefits in using caddy or another non mainstre
by rmoriz 6y ago
Caddy underwent a complete rewrite that also invalidated most of the existing config. Personally I don't see any benefits in using caddy or another non mainstream httpd as it adds more risk to my project with usually very little benefits. Nothing against using it for hobby projects but in production I've migrated back to nginx.
- megous 6y agoI had an itch to look at Caddy, after reading the comments, but breaking configuration backwards compatibility is a huge turn off.
- mholt 6y agov1 was an experiment. v2 is not.
- miedpo 6y agoYou should definitely take a look at it - Caddy works fantastically well. To give you an idea about the compatibility differences, it's like the upgrade from Vue.js 2 to Vue.js 3. Some changes to format are necessary for the new architecture. But you can always just run the older version (that's what I do). And swapping to the new one isn't terribly painful if your just using vanilla (for Caddy 1 extensions, which weren't created by the developer himself most of the time, I'm sure Caddy 2 versions will pop up over time).
- anderspitman 6y agoPersonally I prefer software that improves (slowly) over time, for at least a couple iterations. It's a balancing act to be sure, and there are diminishing returns to changing things up, but I think very little software comes out of the gate in a >80% optimal form. I haven't found the changes in Caddy's config format to be problematic in the least.