4 ms·
That's not debt. Those are working configurations on a fully supported web server with active development. There is zero reason to change them.
by onli 5y ago
That's not debt. Those are working configurations on a fully supported web server with active development. There is zero reason to change them.
- blakewatson 5y agoThis. There's nothing wrong with using mature technology that is still being developed. LAMP is still a perfectly fine choice if it's what you want to use.
- atatatat 5y ago> This. There's nothing wrong with using mature technology that is still being developed. Surely this decade they've squashed the last bugs that nginx or anything newer won't have...
- KptMarchewa 5y agoTying that kind of business logic with http server is a technical debt. Not by 90s standards maybe.
- innocenat 5y agoSo putting these config in .htaccess which live in project folder is a technical debt, but putting all these logics in nginx master config file is not?
- cestith 5y agoWhen the reason a team can't unbind from one technology in favor of county and that reason is old decisions that we won't make today, that's a form of debt. If you're choosing to stick white Apache for a good reason it's not debt.
- onli 5y agoI don't think we disagree here. If old systems stay with a legacy technology and do other work instead of changing that foundation, then staying with the legacy technology can become technical debt - not the decision itself, back in the day. But Apache is not a legacy system and still a completely valid choice, next to alternatives like nginx and caddy that have their own advantages and disadvantages. There is no reason to swap Apache out by default, apart from maybe sometimes in specific situations.