Live data from Hacker News

Yeoman: Modern workflows for modern webapps

yeoman.io

71–77 of 77 posts

Re: Yeoman: Modern workflows for modern webapps

#71
I don't know who to reply to: There's a lot of correct comments from people saying they don't want to run a script through curl from a site. Fair enough.

But why not just fork the repo on Github (or onto your own infrastructure) and run the script from there, where you can verify any tampering?

Re: Yeoman: Modern workflows for modern webapps

#72
post #59
post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn't you have bigger problems at that point?

No, you might just be drinking coffee, or at a library, or on Google's public Wifi, etc.

Say you try logging into your gmail. Couldn't they spoof the DNS and point you to a "proxy" that skims your credentials?

Re: Yeoman: Modern workflows for modern webapps

#73
post #36

I have a similar more light-weight project template that requires no installation (except node). Pith auto-generates test module dependencies and uses Backbone too :) https://github.com/sym3tri/pith

I like how it sets up shims I always re-implement in require.js. Sweet.

Re: Yeoman: Modern workflows for modern webapps

#74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anyone who values the user experience over the tiny chance of a security breach. I'm not validating it as a good practice, but that seems to be the main reason and I've not heard of Pow or Homebrew causing any problems in this regard.. yet ;-)

Never mind the security aspect, how am I going to uninstall the damn thing or upgrade its components (which other things in my system might use) with a custom installer? There's a reason I don't install things that don't use apt.

https://github.com/yeoman/yeoman/wiki/Manual-Install

There is a manual installation process provided on the front page; Yeoman itself appears to be a Node.js module in the node package manager npm.

Re: Yeoman: Modern workflows for modern webapps

#75
post #5

I am currently using Brunch[1] as a build system. How does Yeoman compare, and why should I switch? I asked this in a previous submission on Grunt, in a thread that talked about Yeoman, but I never got an answer. [1]: http://brunch.io/ EDIT: It looks like the new FAQ addresses this issue: http://yeoman.io/faq.html > "How does Yeoman differ from tools like Brunch or BBB?" and "How does Yeoman differ from Grunt?". Post…

Yeoman and Brunch have many differences. You can read the small essay on them here:

https://github.com/brunch/brunch/issues/408

Bower support is coming to brunch in the next release.

Re: Yeoman: Modern workflows for modern webapps

#76
post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't that just a suggestion to get up and running quickly (for example on a dev VM)? There's nobody forcing devs to blindly follow the instruction and pipe it directly into bash. You are free to curl -L -o install.sh get.whatever.com if you want to inspect the install script.

> There's nobody forcing devs to blindly follow the instruction and pipe it directly into bash "Nobody's forcing you" is the weakest argument.

Citation?

Just kidding.

It's not an argument at all. It's a manner of speech. To be more verbose: I can't think of a compelling reason why you would blindly type whatever instructions you see on the screen, into your terminal. Unless you were being forced.

Re: Yeoman: Modern workflows for modern webapps

#77
post #72
post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, you might just be drinking coffee, or at a library, or on Google's public Wifi, etc.

Say you try logging into your gmail. Couldn't they spoof the DNS and point you to a "proxy" that skims your credentials?

HTTPS is an entirely different story, I don't know that people would necessarily like installs like "curl https://my.script.ly | sh", but there's at least a mechanism to verify the identity of the source.
Post reply on HN