4 ms·

Warning: This checks if it’s running the latest version and refuses to run if it isn’t up to date. They just released v0.0.16 15 minutes ago and the update hasn

Warning: This checks if it’s running the latest version and refuses to run if it isn’t up to date. They just released v0.0.16 15 minutes ago and the update hasn’t hit Homebrew yet, so it has completely disabled itself and won’t run. There doesn’t seem to be any option to skip the version check. So don’t use this unless you don’t mind it breaking randomly whenever there’s an update.

mholt 3y ago
When I first announced Caddy, our website downloaded everything as .gz due to high traffic load -- a lesson I learned very quickly and a mistake I never made again. This probably falls in the same boat. :)
- emi2k01 3y ago
  Sorry, maybe it's too early in the day but I don't get what the lesson was. Could you explain?
  - orliesaurus 3y ago
    (IMHO) the lesson is that sometimes you're excited to tell the world about what you built, that you forget about some "other stuff" i.e. I don't think that the authors of this tool wanted to have developers be forced to use the latest version of their tool. It's probably that they didn't think about it when they wrote the code, but now they know and hopefully this gets fixed in the next release?
    - hackmiester 3y ago
      I just don't understand what the thing about "downloading everything as .gz" means. It's not like a gz is a rare file format, it seems like a totally reasonable format to download something in.
      - mholt 3y ago
        To clarify, every page load (.html file) was downloaded as a .gz file instead of being served as an HTML file and displayed as a web page in the browser.
      - wolfgang42 3y ago
        Having once made a similar mistake myself, I assume what they mean is that it was downloading everything as a .gz—that is, the browser was asking users “where would you like to save index.html.gz?” instead of showing the homepage. (This happens when you precompress a static site for performance, but forget to tell the server that gzip should be negotiated as a Content-Encoding instead of a Content-Type.)
    - mholt 3y ago
      Yeah, exactly. A lot goes into shipping, and sometimes things like this can be overlooked, especially on a small team that needs to deliver broad platform support right out of the gate. There are some bugs that are just hard to find until they're out there.
- thomasfromcdnjs 3y ago
  When we first release cdnjs.com we used tools to check if the DNS had fully propagated... but it hadn't. The shame of a cdn being down in several places across the globe.
jollyllama 3y ago
Gross. Thanks for the heads up!
- apgwoz 3y ago
  Not affiliated with them, but it seems this was a mistake. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39768685 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39768685 -- maybe give it another shot?
- pmarreck 3y ago
  They fixed this. It's now a warning.
benburkert 3y ago
Sorry about that, we're working on switching this to a warning and not an error, that slipped by us before release. After the next update, it will only show a warning if you're not on the latest release.
- benburkert 3y ago
  We just released a fix for the version error, this will be the last one you see, we promise!
  - fbdab103 3y ago
    How about being able to disable the check entirely? I really dislike tools phoning home unless asked.
  - JimDabell 3y ago
    Thanks. The upgrade command v0.0.15 gives didn’t work for me. In fact the only method I found that would successfully update was to uninstall it, then untap your tap, then reinstall. Also, I echo the other people saying that the typeface you chose for the website is very difficult to read.
hipadev23 3y ago
That's an absurd tactic I've not seen since last time I used Firefox.
- yoavm 3y ago
  you're completely free to run firefox from 5 years ago and it will not refuse to run.
  - cookiengineer 3y ago
    No, you are not. Mozilla bricked SSL certificates that are mandatory for everything, including Browser Extensions. There is a flag for about:config to unbrick it. Problem is though, that this lasts less than a second because of the remote settings service running in a loop. If you block that services domain with a host firewall (like opensnitch), Firefox will do an endless for loop using 100% CPU load trying to request the shavar and other services domains. So, effectively, you cannot run an old Firefox version, and especially not a version that uses the old bundled mozilla certificate (which is all provided download variants). That's what the previous commenter was (likely) referring to.
    - yoavm 3y ago
      Just for the fun I went to https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/53.0/linux-x86_64/en-US/ https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/53.0/linux-x86_... and downloaded Firefox 53 from 2017. Font are ugly but it loaded HN just fine.
      - cookiengineer 3y ago
        > you're completely free to run firefox from 5 years ago > Firefox 53 from 2017 not the same. I was talking about post-quantum Firefox releases, which added the mentioned dependencies on Mozilla's SSL certificate. (The grandparent's comment was also about post-quantum, obviously)
        3y ago

mholt 3y ago

When I first announced Caddy, our website downloaded everything as .gz due to high traffic load -- a lesson I learned very quickly and a mistake I never made again. This probably falls in the same boat. :)

emi2k01 3y ago
Sorry, maybe it's too early in the day but I don't get what the lesson was. Could you explain?
- orliesaurus 3y ago
  (IMHO) the lesson is that sometimes you're excited to tell the world about what you built, that you forget about some "other stuff" i.e. I don't think that the authors of this tool wanted to have developers be forced to use the latest version of their tool. It's probably that they didn't think about it when they wrote the code, but now they know and hopefully this gets fixed in the next release?
  - hackmiester 3y ago
    I just don't understand what the thing about "downloading everything as .gz" means. It's not like a gz is a rare file format, it seems like a totally reasonable format to download something in.
    - mholt 3y ago
      To clarify, every page load (.html file) was downloaded as a .gz file instead of being served as an HTML file and displayed as a web page in the browser.
    - wolfgang42 3y ago
      Having once made a similar mistake myself, I assume what they mean is that it was downloading everything as a .gz—that is, the browser was asking users “where would you like to save index.html.gz?” instead of showing the homepage. (This happens when you precompress a static site for performance, but forget to tell the server that gzip should be negotiated as a Content-Encoding instead of a Content-Type.)
  - mholt 3y ago
    Yeah, exactly. A lot goes into shipping, and sometimes things like this can be overlooked, especially on a small team that needs to deliver broad platform support right out of the gate. There are some bugs that are just hard to find until they're out there.
thomasfromcdnjs 3y ago
When we first release cdnjs.com we used tools to check if the DNS had fully propagated... but it hadn't. The shame of a cdn being down in several places across the globe.

jollyllama 3y ago

Gross. Thanks for the heads up!

apgwoz 3y ago
Not affiliated with them, but it seems this was a mistake. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39768685 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39768685 -- maybe give it another shot?
pmarreck 3y ago
They fixed this. It's now a warning.

benburkert 3y ago

Sorry about that, we're working on switching this to a warning and not an error, that slipped by us before release. After the next update, it will only show a warning if you're not on the latest release.

benburkert 3y ago
We just released a fix for the version error, this will be the last one you see, we promise!
- fbdab103 3y ago
  How about being able to disable the check entirely? I really dislike tools phoning home unless asked.
- JimDabell 3y ago
  Thanks. The upgrade command v0.0.15 gives didn’t work for me. In fact the only method I found that would successfully update was to uninstall it, then untap your tap, then reinstall. Also, I echo the other people saying that the typeface you chose for the website is very difficult to read.

hipadev23 3y ago

That's an absurd tactic I've not seen since last time I used Firefox.

yoavm 3y ago
you're completely free to run firefox from 5 years ago and it will not refuse to run.
- cookiengineer 3y ago
  No, you are not. Mozilla bricked SSL certificates that are mandatory for everything, including Browser Extensions. There is a flag for about:config to unbrick it. Problem is though, that this lasts less than a second because of the remote settings service running in a loop. If you block that services domain with a host firewall (like opensnitch), Firefox will do an endless for loop using 100% CPU load trying to request the shavar and other services domains. So, effectively, you cannot run an old Firefox version, and especially not a version that uses the old bundled mozilla certificate (which is all provided download variants). That's what the previous commenter was (likely) referring to.
  - yoavm 3y ago
    Just for the fun I went to https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/53.0/linux-x86_64/en-US/ https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/53.0/linux-x86_... and downloaded Firefox 53 from 2017. Font are ugly but it loaded HN just fine.
    - cookiengineer 3y ago
      > you're completely free to run firefox from 5 years ago > Firefox 53 from 2017 not the same. I was talking about post-quantum Firefox releases, which added the mentioned dependencies on Mozilla's SSL certificate. (The grandparent's comment was also about post-quantum, obviously)
      - 3y ago