Moving from Disqus to Schnack
blog.webkid.io
Moving from Disqus to Schnack
1–10 of 120 posts
Re: Moving from Disqus to Schnack
#2So in order to use this, you need to host a new Node app and SQLite database on your server. Also, things like spam control are now back on you.
So why not just use a CMS or blog engine which supports traditional server-side comments? I suppose there is a case if you're hosting static HTML pages but still want them to be commentable, but how many people are doing that? I don't get the use case for this.
Re: Moving from Disqus to Schnack
#3The point of Disqus is that you don't have to host anything and you can publish an essentially "static" website using any static website generator or just plain HTML pages you make yourself.
At this point just build your website around the numerous CMS/Blog options available that have numerous solid comment and spam prevention systems.
Re: Moving from Disqus to Schnack
#4So in order to use this, you need to host a new Node app and SQLite database on your server. Also, things like spam control are now back on you. So why not just use a CMS or blog engine which supports traditional server-side comments? I suppose there is a case if you're hosting static HTML pages but still want them to be commentable, but how many people are doing that? I don't get the use case for this.
Indeed. One of the reasons disqus and the like are popular is that they take care of hosting the comments.
And having user content on a separate domain isn't a bad idea from a security pov.
Re: Moving from Disqus to Schnack
#5So in order to use this, you need to host a new Node app and SQLite database on your server. Also, things like spam control are now back on you. So why not just use a CMS or blog engine which supports traditional server-side comments? I suppose there is a case if you're hosting static HTML pages but still want them to be commentable, but how many people are doing that? I don't get the use case for this.
Indeed. One of the reasons disqus and the like are popular is that they take care of hosting the comments. And having user content on a separate domain isn't a bad idea from a security pov.
Nothing's stopping you from running a self-hosted solution on a different domain.
Re: Moving from Disqus to Schnack
#6So in order to use this, you need to host a new Node app and SQLite database on your server. Also, things like spam control are now back on you. So why not just use a CMS or blog engine which supports traditional server-side comments? I suppose there is a case if you're hosting static HTML pages but still want them to be commentable, but how many people are doing that? I don't get the use case for this.
Because you like everything else about the static blog (static files are easily hosted and trivial to move to other hosts or CDNs, many devs like the integration with git, you like the workflow of doing everything locally until the push to publish, good hosting solutions that scale a lot are really cheap).
If something goes wrong with the server you host (suddenly tons of visitors, some failure), only your comments are down, not your entire site, assuming the static hosting is on other infrastructure (and even if not, it's easily moved again).
Maybe you used an external service before and want to get rid of it, like the example in the article, but do not want to completely change how your blog works for this.
Re: Moving from Disqus to Schnack
#7Earlier quoted context omitted.
Indeed. One of the reasons disqus and the like are popular is that they take care of hosting the comments. And having user content on a separate domain isn't a bad idea from a security pov.
Nothing's stopping you from running a self-hosted solution on a different domain.
Sure, but then you have to run a self hosted solution on another domain. It's far easier if someone else is willing to do it for you at a low cost (or even free).
Re: Moving from Disqus to Schnack
#8So in order to use this, you need to host a new Node app and SQLite database on your server. Also, things like spam control are now back on you. So why not just use a CMS or blog engine which supports traditional server-side comments? I suppose there is a case if you're hosting static HTML pages but still want them to be commentable, but how many people are doing that? I don't get the use case for this.
Because you like everything else about the static blog (static files are easily hosted and trivial to move to other hosts or CDNs, many devs like the integration with git, you like the workflow of doing everything locally until the push to publish, good hosting solutions that scale a lot are really cheap). If something goes wrong with the server you host (suddenly tons of visitors, some failure), only your comments a…
Part of the motivation for using a static site (especially GitHub Pages) is to eliminate the time, energy and cost of doing DevOps.
Going full DevOps just for blog comments is not great ROI. If I couldn't use Disqus/FB Comments and was forced to self-host my own blog comments on my static blog, I'd just remove blog comments altogether.
Re: Moving from Disqus to Schnack
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because you like everything else about the static blog (static files are easily hosted and trivial to move to other hosts or CDNs, many devs like the integration with git, you like the workflow of doing everything locally until the push to publish, good hosting solutions that scale a lot are really cheap). If something goes wrong with the server you host (suddenly tons of visitors, some failure), only your comments a…
Part of the motivation for using a static site (especially GitHub Pages) is to eliminate the time, energy and cost of doing DevOps. Going full DevOps just for blog comments is not great ROI. If I couldn't use Disqus/FB Comments and was forced to self-host my own blog comments on my static blog, I'd just remove blog comments altogether.
Sure, I can see why you'd make that choice (just as I know people who never would touch Disqus or FB comments).
Doesn't mean others wouldn't throw up a comment system somewhere, in the knowledge that the most important part of their site (the content) isn't affected if it doesn't keep up and they exactly do not need to invest the time and energy to "go full DevOps" for that.
Re: Moving from Disqus to Schnack
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because you like everything else about the static blog (static files are easily hosted and trivial to move to other hosts or CDNs, many devs like the integration with git, you like the workflow of doing everything locally until the push to publish, good hosting solutions that scale a lot are really cheap). If something goes wrong with the server you host (suddenly tons of visitors, some failure), only your comments a…
Part of the motivation for using a static site (especially GitHub Pages) is to eliminate the time, energy and cost of doing DevOps. Going full DevOps just for blog comments is not great ROI. If I couldn't use Disqus/FB Comments and was forced to self-host my own blog comments on my static blog, I'd just remove blog comments altogether.
I already have a static blog and like 8 non static apps on my server. If I were to add comments I'd rather host a comment server than convert my blog to something other than static files.