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

Boring Technology Checklist

blog.begin.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 119 posts

Re: Boring Technology Checklist

#81

Post by Jensson »

wyager wrote: post #57

> friendly community (Code of Conduct, blogs, chats, podcasts, etc.) In my experience, most of these things negatively correlate with stuff I actually want (like software quality or stability). It indicates a software ecosystem that exists mostly as an ersatz social outlet for a certain kind of person. The best softwares I use tend to have none of this stuff - maybe just a mailing list and a bug tracker.

Yeah, boring technology requires boring owners to ensure that stuff like Python 3 wont happen.

Re: Boring Technology Checklist

#82

Post by kingcharles »

k__ wrote: post #66

I wonder, how many engineers will switch their jobs because they have to work with boring tech? Sure, the stack you're using isn't everything and other parts of a project can be just as exciting. But I often heard engineers complain about their company being stuck in the past and they wish to use all the cool tech they see in the news.

I've worked at companies where many of the devs were not remotely excited about any new technologies and just wanted to do their 9-5 and get home to the wife and kids, which is a totally valid career choice. These guys just wanted to stick with what worked and what they knew. They LOVED boring.

Re: Boring Technology Checklist

#83

Post by mschuster91 »

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #11
zdw wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They may not be, but cgi-bin, webservers, and monitoring via grep /var/log/www/*.log are.

You say that, but setting up a LAMP stack from scratch is more involved than just yeeting something onto GCP these days.

On Debian, a LAMP stack should not take more than an hour to set up from scratch.

Re: Boring Technology Checklist

#84

Post by foobiekr »

erikpukinskis wrote: post #14
mrkentutbabi wrote: post #2

What about between 2 boring technologies? For example I’m debating between Eleventy and Hugo (because I know both JS and Go, but not Ruby so I will skip Jekyll)

Flip a coin, try the first one out, and if anything pops up in a few days that makes you think the other might be more suitable, evaluate the other one. I recently started experimenting with Snowpack for JS build. I realized it doesn’t do sourcemaps very will so I grabbed Parcel. That worked great but doesn’t have a testing story and Vite has a couple options there. Vite has been good. It was work to evaluate each of…

I do this. But 1d20 / options. Crit fail means ignore for a week otherwise divide up the space evenly and extra slots mean re-roll. Having the option to punt is useful.

Re: Boring Technology Checklist

#86

Post by mrweasel »

ape4 wrote: post #29

I hate to say it, but in many ways Windows checks many boxes - its backwards compatible for decades. Programs from 30 years ago still work fine.

Hate to agree, but yes. A C++ application using the APIs provided by Windows is pretty much unbreakable by time.

Re: Boring Technology Checklist

#88

Post by mrweasel »

mrkentutbabi wrote: post #2

What about between 2 boring technologies? For example I’m debating between Eleventy and Hugo (because I know both JS and Go, but not Ruby so I will skip Jekyll)

Boring is on a scale, and you need a reference to assess the level of boringness. Eleventy, Hugo and Jekyll are all a little to non-boring compared to ssg6 or just throwing txt files in www-root.

Re: Boring Technology Checklist

#89

Post by mrkentutbabi »

erikpukinskis wrote: post #14
mrkentutbabi wrote: post #2

What about between 2 boring technologies? For example I’m debating between Eleventy and Hugo (because I know both JS and Go, but not Ruby so I will skip Jekyll)

Flip a coin, try the first one out, and if anything pops up in a few days that makes you think the other might be more suitable, evaluate the other one. I recently started experimenting with Snowpack for JS build. I realized it doesn’t do sourcemaps very will so I grabbed Parcel. That worked great but doesn’t have a testing story and Vite has a couple options there. Vite has been good. It was work to evaluate each of…

Good advice thanks
Post reply on HN