Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Gatsby raises $15M Series A for its modern web development platform

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 213 posts

Re: Gatsby raises $15M Series A for its modern web development platform

#131

Post by gherkinnn »

Scarbutt wrote: post #124
c0ffe wrote: post #116

I would not recommend to use Gatsby in a project if it requires a frontend with complexity beyond static-scrollable content. Some problems that I found after some months of integrating it with an existing CMS: * Development complexity: depending if Gatsby is run on development or production mode, React's `render` methods are called in the browser or inside NodeJS. Having this code executed in a Node process is expect…

Now to be honest, the global idea seems good (static websites built with React) Out of interest, what's good about building static websites with React?

I prefer React over any other templating lang I’ve used so far.

Though I never liked Gatsby.

Re: Gatsby raises $15M Series A for its modern web development platform

#132

Post by VvR-Ox »

tyingq wrote: post #93

A static page framework that shoves content into a client side graphql store and then extracts bits out to render a page? It's popular, so I can't say it was a bad idea. I guess I'll just say I must be old because it sounds like satire.

That's what the lemmings said before they jumped the cliff ;-)

Re: Gatsby raises $15M Series A for its modern web development platform

#133

Post by c0ffe »

enlyth wrote: post #127
c0ffe wrote: post #116

I would not recommend to use Gatsby in a project if it requires a frontend with complexity beyond static-scrollable content. Some problems that I found after some months of integrating it with an existing CMS: * Development complexity: depending if Gatsby is run on development or production mode, React's `render` methods are called in the browser or inside NodeJS. Having this code executed in a Node process is expect…

> JSX code is hard to debug, because the code that is really executed is generated at runtime, so it is not possible for example, to put a breakpoint in a JSX file from your text editor and start a build with Node running in debug mode I don't get it, is this some Gatsby limitation? I've been debugging JSX since the dawn of time with breakpoints, even with SSR and typescript

To me its a bit tricky to summarize, so its a long answer.

During the build, Gatsby compiles JSX and saves the result in a temporal folder. Some time after, it spawns several subprocesses that execute the mentioned resulting JS files (to render each page in the site).

What I meant with "the JSX code is hard to debug" is:

* The JSX code is actually run inside subprocesses, and NodeJS allows to debug a process if its run with the `--inspect` command line argument. But I did not found documentation in the Gatsby website about how to change the arguments of these subprocesses. Note that this only applies to production builds (development mode executes all JSX in the browser).

* From the text editor perspective, the breakpoints are defined in the original JSX source files, not the built ones. I understand that in theory line/column mapping can be done using map files, but I did not have time yet to investigate the cleanest way to make the IDE, Docker (not actually a Gatsby requirement), the temporal Webpack build directory, and Gatsby subprocesses to work together.

Re: Gatsby raises $15M Series A for its modern web development platform

#134

Post by onion2k »

wp381640 wrote: post #96
[deleted] wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[deleted]

> I wrote one once, and it was a couple hundred lines of code. This demonstrates a complete misunderstanding of the problem domain edit: rather than cheapshot with a throwaway comment i'll expand on this - from my experience what Gatsby provides is an open source pluggable info processing pipeline. I'm really interested in seeing it develop as a replacement for some of the larger and much more expensive and proprieta…

I use Gatsby and I like it, but the alternative is a few hundred lines of code if you're doing what Gatsby says it does (eg a static site generator for markdown files). The fact Gatsby can do much more doesn't mean everyone who uses it is doing the other stuff.

If you just want a static site Gatsby is overkill.

Re: Gatsby raises $15M Series A for its modern web development platform

#135

Post by onion2k »

gexla wrote: post #87
csande17 wrote: post #81

I don't really like Gatsby's product, but I've got to admit that their business strategy makes a lot of sense. It's a pretty good three-step approach: 1. Convince the WordPress/enterprise crowd to switch over, both by touting the genuine benefits of static sites (security, scalability, TTFB performance, etc.) and by riding the Cool Kid Front-End Stack hype train. 2. Lock them in with an overly-complicated framework a…

> Convince the WordPress/enterprise crowd to switch over The Gatsby homepage mentions Wordpress as a possible data source. I don't evens see mention of their CMS on the front page. The only "service" I see them advertising there is Preview - which seems to be a development collaboration tool. I don't think they're convincing people to move away from Wordpress. It's funny that the article talks about moving away from…

Content managers like WordPress and have lots of experience with it. Using it as a backend is fine. Gatsby on the frontend has advantages (speed, security, etc). Combining the two makes a lot of sense.

Re: Gatsby raises $15M Series A for its modern web development platform

#137

Post by andrethegiant »

kilburn wrote: post #69
mattkevan wrote: post #50

Big fan of static site generators and the whole JAMStack idea in general - I use Jekyll extensively - but after building a site with Gatsby, I found it too over-engineered. React is great, and definitely has its place, but to set up React, GraphQL and all the surrounding tooling just to assemble some text files into a template seems like complexity for the sake of it. For me, the fun of static sites - after years of…

TLDR: I just completed a large project built with Gatsby, and wouldn't recommend it to anyone. The technology is extremely complicated, and the end result quite inflexible. Here's an idea of how the whole thing works when you have non-technical users: 1. You need some sort of Content Management System for non-technical users to be able to create content. 2. That CMS stores the content however it sees fit (db/files/wh…

> Users hate not being able to immediately see how their content will look like

Shameless plug: I'm building a product that does what Gatsby Preview does, except it's platform agnostic, and ties in tighter wth the feedback/review process. https://featurepeek.com

Re: Gatsby raises $15M Series A for its modern web development platform

#138

Post by ascorbic »

ta1234567890 wrote: post #70
dunerat wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm one of the use cases that Sam mentions - B2C website. Replatforming our site with Gatsby, Netlify (hosting and more) and Contentful (headless CMS) has saved us hundreds of dollars a month in hosting - our site which receives 20,000 - 30,000 visitors a month now costs $0 to host. Additionally it is radically faster and more secure than it previously was. Being able to use React as needed has enabled us to manage s…

This sounds way too good to be true. Specially considering the stories from other people here, which include a lot more technical detail. Also the other users are not new accounts with just one comment (unlike the user above).

Am I more convincing, with a six year old account?

I'm the exact target market for Gatsby, and can confirm the benefits that GP gave. Perhaps I can tell you how I've been selling it to my clients. I work at an agency, which builds sites in the ~$100k range. Most of our clients are currently using something like Drupal, or an ancient proprietary CMS. The RFPs now often specify Drupal "or other open source CMS". We're now offering them Gatsby + headless Drupal, and it gives them some significant benefits. These are sites that are currently paying thousands per month on multiple load-balanced Drupal servers, or managed hosts like Acquila. Gatsby lets them switch to a single Drupal instance on something like Lightsail, firewalled to give access to just their admins. Gatsby can then build the site (using CodeBuild or Amplify) and deploy to S3, so their hosting fees are then tens of dollars in CloudFront egress plus Lightsail. They also don't need 24x7 Drupal support, because it doesn't matter if the server ges down in the middle of the night, because their site stays up, and they don't need instant Drupalgeddon patching because their server isn't public-accessible.

I think the classic JAMStack/Markdown features of Gatsby are a red herring. I love them for my own site, but no client will use them (even with Netlify CMS, unfortunately). However it gets developers like me to try it out, and hopefully realise the benefits that it can offer.

Re: Gatsby raises $15M Series A for its modern web development platform

#139

Post by gherkinnn »

c0ffe wrote: post #116

I would not recommend to use Gatsby in a project if it requires a frontend with complexity beyond static-scrollable content. Some problems that I found after some months of integrating it with an existing CMS: * Development complexity: depending if Gatsby is run on development or production mode, React's `render` methods are called in the browser or inside NodeJS. Having this code executed in a Node process is expect…

> Not recommend in a project that requires more than a scrollable site

I agree. Though I’d add that I found it too complex for a quick .md -> html site as well.

Next does a better job at complex things and one might as well use Hugo/Hexo for a .md blog. I don’t know how much can be found in between.

Re: Gatsby raises $15M Series A for its modern web development platform

#140

Post by azangru »

Scarbutt wrote: post #124
c0ffe wrote: post #116

I would not recommend to use Gatsby in a project if it requires a frontend with complexity beyond static-scrollable content. Some problems that I found after some months of integrating it with an existing CMS: * Development complexity: depending if Gatsby is run on development or production mode, React's `render` methods are called in the browser or inside NodeJS. Having this code executed in a Node process is expect…

Now to be honest, the global idea seems good (static websites built with React) Out of interest, what's good about building static websites with React?

> what's good about building static websites with React

As compared to which alternatives?

Personally, I find the splitting up of code into components, together with the power and expressiveness of jsx and its closeness to plain javascript, and the simplicity of updating the ui in response to changes of state to be a very compelling argument for react.

Post reply on HN