2 ms·

I don't think one is morally superior to the other, but there are trade-offs. With bash, cron, rsync, and a vps, one is using stable, long-lived tools that usu

I don't think one is morally superior to the other, but there are trade-offs. With bash, cron, rsync, and a vps, one is using stable, long-lived tools that usually come with Linux, are vetted and patched automatically, and are familiar in the sense that those same tools can be used for all sorts of tasks, not just frontend development. There is also the argument that the only remote piece controlled by the service provider is a vps which still gives you lots of control and flexibility with minimal lock-in. I prefer somewhere in the middle of the two extremes, but I see more appeal to the "old" approach than you allude to.

jameshart 4y ago
Funny that tools distributed via a linux package manager are considered 'vetted and patched automatically', but a broadly used JS build tool distributed via npm is likely seen as an unstable dependency, or worse a supply-chain attack vector. Sure, there are maturity differences but it's nowhere near so vast a difference as some claim. These are just preferences. It's not a culture war issue.
- sickill 4y ago
  If you don’t understand the difference between software shipped by a distro and software shipped by developer (npmjs.com) then all is left is preferences or culture war issues. However there’s fundamental difference: in a model of distribution by a distro the developer only produces a software but they don’t release it themselves. They provide source code and that’s it. Maintainers of packages for each distro vet new releases, test, and sometimes patch them so they work best within context of a given distro. So there’s extra effort spent on making sure the software is stable. In a model where a developer publishes their new release to some package repository directly (npmjs.com is just one of them, same applies to pypi.org, rubygems.org, etc) that extra “QA” by others than the developer doesn’t happen.

jameshart 4y ago

Funny that tools distributed via a linux package manager are considered 'vetted and patched automatically', but a broadly used JS build tool distributed via npm is likely seen as an unstable dependency, or worse a supply-chain attack vector. Sure, there are maturity differences but it's nowhere near so vast a difference as some claim. These are just preferences. It's not a culture war issue.

sickill 4y ago
If you don’t understand the difference between software shipped by a distro and software shipped by developer (npmjs.com) then all is left is preferences or culture war issues. However there’s fundamental difference: in a model of distribution by a distro the developer only produces a software but they don’t release it themselves. They provide source code and that’s it. Maintainers of packages for each distro vet new releases, test, and sometimes patch them so they work best within context of a given distro. So there’s extra effort spent on making sure the software is stable. In a model where a developer publishes their new release to some package repository directly (npmjs.com is just one of them, same applies to pypi.org, rubygems.org, etc) that extra “QA” by others than the developer doesn’t happen.