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

Opensource.cooking: A simple, bloat-free cooking site

opensource.cooking

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 169 posts

Re: Opensource.cooking: A simple, bloat-free cooking site

#141

Post by freddie_mercury »

dogma1138 wrote: post #76
neaden wrote: post #8

So as someone who cooks a lot, and gets frustrated by long blog like posts that lots of recipes have this day, this website is probably even less useful for me. The tagging system isn't being used correctly, Ham Sandwich is tagged with Banana for some reason. Speaking of Ham sandwich some of the recipes are just way too simple, this just tells me how to assemble a sandwich which I don't think anyone really needs. Tho…

Buy a few good cooking books. Far better and more useful than hunting on the internet. And most importantly start your own recipe book.

Yeah, I'm not sure why people are so averse to just buying one or two cookbooks.

You can buy The Essential New York Times Cookbook for $2.99 right now which has 1,000+ recipes from decades of The New York Times.

And even without special pricing you can get something like The Joy of Cooking or How to Cook Everything for $20. Just one of those books is, realistically, all you need for a lifetime of cooking and will give you far more recipes and far better instruction than the website in the OP.

Re: Opensource.cooking: A simple, bloat-free cooking site

#142

Post by GoodOldNe »

crftr wrote: post #133
GoodOldNe wrote: post #126

I love the open source model, and there's some good looking recipes here! Along similar lines, with similar goals, my wife and her dad have been building this as a pandemic project: https://www.recipereform.com/ -- I (who am admittedly biased) think it's pretty great. She inherited this style of recipe organization from her grandmother, and I love the formatting it of it, how clean the recipes end up looking and how…

Love the recipe presentation! Years ago I remember seeing a table layout on CookingForEngineers--but this is a significant improvement. One suggestion: Add iconography to indicate cooking apparatus. The gestalt of your nested layout gave me a quick sense of the prep and cooking phases, but it would be nice to see if I need to preheat the oven or pull out the backyard grill.

That's great feedback. Thanks! I agree, icons would be helpful and could fit nicely into the aesthetic.

I love that CookingForEngineers site. The original name I had suggested to her was Recipes for Engineers, since that was the vibe the table/nested flow layout gave me, it's cool to see someone else doing a similar thing.

Re: Opensource.cooking: A simple, bloat-free cooking site

#143

Post by patrickk »

aqfamnzc wrote: post #136
rossjudson wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had so much fun making ! I love to recreate recipes for . I’ve been so pleased with the end result! It is the best dish ever! My really enjoy it. You will enjoy it too. If you're planning to have just one half, you may want to reconsider, because once you start, you won't be able to stop. This is really the best one I've found! Please see my other recipes and visit the links below. I really like making this with my…

What is ? (1 paragraph explanation) What is the best way to make ? (1 paragraph, mentioning by name at least 8 times) What are benefits of ? The aggressive SEO tactics, more than anything, are what drives me crazy.

I blame google more than anything. Unfortunately, stuffing the content to hit minimum word counts is what ranks in google, and google obviously has a monopoly on search. Without this annoying blah blah, these websites would never rank and it wouldn’t be worth the authors time to make a recipe website. Maybe google should make a blog post on a “recipes” algo update that punishes filler content (of course they will never do that, they have all the arrogance befitting a monopoly provider). Readers, SEOs, cooks and even google themselves would benefit /rant over

I mainly use BBC Good Food. Being taxpayer funded and having unlimited google juice means they don’t need to play this game.

Re: Opensource.cooking: A simple, bloat-free cooking site

#144

Post by 2muchcoffeeman »

corytheboyd wrote: post #93
neaden wrote: post #8

So as someone who cooks a lot, and gets frustrated by long blog like posts that lots of recipes have this day, this website is probably even less useful for me. The tagging system isn't being used correctly, Ham Sandwich is tagged with Banana for some reason. Speaking of Ham sandwich some of the recipes are just way too simple, this just tells me how to assemble a sandwich which I don't think anyone really needs. Tho…

Honestly, just using a straight up wiki (with good moderation of course) sounds way more useful than anything proprietary.

Good point. Why is there no cooking wiki?

Re: Opensource.cooking: A simple, bloat-free cooking site

#146

Post by onion2k »

locua wrote: post #99
lupire wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, they added a donation feature to make money. Hacker style!

Well when we have 2TB of recipes someone will have to pay for server costs... ;)

I'm pretty good at telling the future. I'm going to say that ... you will have to pay.

People go to recipe sites for the content, they read it, and then they leave. They don't click on adverts or engage in any monetizable way. People build recipe sites because getting a database of recipes is easy and they're trivial to build so you can throw a site with lots of pages (and lots of ads) up on the web fast. That doesn't mean they generate any revenue.

Re: Opensource.cooking: A simple, bloat-free cooking site

#147

Post by oakesm9 »

patrickk wrote: post #143
aqfamnzc wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is ? (1 paragraph explanation) What is the best way to make ? (1 paragraph, mentioning by name at least 8 times) What are benefits of ? The aggressive SEO tactics, more than anything, are what drives me crazy.

I blame google more than anything. Unfortunately, stuffing the content to hit minimum word counts is what ranks in google, and google obviously has a monopoly on search. Without this annoying blah blah, these websites would never rank and it wouldn’t be worth the authors time to make a recipe website. Maybe google should make a blog post on a “recipes” algo update that punishes filler content (of course they will nev…

BBC Good Food is actually a commercial company rather than being publicly funded. It comes from the commercial arm of the BBC (BBC Worldwide).

BBC Food was the publicly funded website, but I think that was shut down a few years ago.

Re: Opensource.cooking: A simple, bloat-free cooking site

#148

Post by pezezin »

markdown wrote: post #90
mattkrause wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a false cognate for the Spanish 'frijoles refritos'. Frito = fried, but re is an "intensifier" that can mean "done again" but may also mean "done thoroughly" or even "in excess". Thus, they are beans that have been fried thoroughly.

TIL, Thanks!

I would like to point out a minor detail: "re-" as an intensifier is characteristic of the dialects of Argentina, Chile, and Mexico: https://www.fundeu.es/recomendacion/recontra-re-rete-requete... (article in Spanish)

In most other dialects it just means "to do again", same as English. Your confusion is understandable, because even for me as a native Spanish speaker, using it as an intensifier sounds funny.

Re: Opensource.cooking: A simple, bloat-free cooking site

#149

Post by unhammer »

2muchcoffeeman wrote: post #144
corytheboyd wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, just using a straight up wiki (with good moderation of course) sounds way more useful than anything proprietary.

Good point. Why is there no cooking wiki?

https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cookbook:Spaghetti_alla_Carbon...
Post reply on HN