151–160 of 409 posts
It would be good to understand what Cloudflare gets out of the deal. The article is very much just "Astro, but someone else pays the bills!" which is of course lovely for Astro.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And they don't. Web development practices are largely driven by what developers want, not what users want. Which is why Google started doing things like measuring Core Web Vitals and having it affect SEO rankings, to force developers to care.
Most non-technical users have no idea what they want. They will happily request a feature to implement an email client in your database.
I am very disappointed with Astro. Who is this framework for? It's been years, and they still don't support unit testing Astro Actions. They still don't support inter-island communication. "Astro v6 is around the corner" - and the only changes are 1. refactored CLI (why? it's perfectly fine) 2. bumped zod to v4 It's great if you want to build a blog or something, but it's definitely far from great for building apps .…
If all you are writing a blog and you're not using Substack or Squarespace or any of the other million blog hosting options you're crazy IMO.
And you get to keep your data in markdown easily portable
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Nextjs has no support From what I remember, you can't even run a NextJS app through vite?
Yes, that's part of the problem, deploying nextjs to cloudflare in the first place used to be an absolute nightmare, let alone the dev experience (I think it's better now)
It would be good to understand what Cloudflare gets out of the deal. The article is very much just "Astro, but someone else pays the bills!" which is of course lovely for Astro.
It would be good to understand what Cloudflare gets out of the deal. The article is very much just "Astro, but someone else pays the bills!" which is of course lovely for Astro.
Cloudflare definitely gets positive PR out of this which makes people forget their CEO's recent meltdown on twitter.
Oh no. This isn’t good. I’m glad that the team gets a payout but as an Astro user I don’t love it being owned by CF and that the goals of the project (at least indirectly) goes from the best way to deploy it to the best way to deploy it using CF.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, I'm not sure I understand why "islands" isn't just "bits of JavaScript on a static page". It feels like the "JavaScript as a Server Side Language" folk are just repeatedly re-inventing stuff that has been done a million times by other systems with a different back-end only with a new fancy name.
The key difference between islands and what we used to do back in the day (js on a static page) is that with an islands approach you architect your site with a components-driven approach where everything encapsulates the js/css/html it needs, then you mark it as an "interactive" island if you actually need client-side js to run – the code is the same, but it either runs only in the server (default) or in both server…
It would be good to understand what Cloudflare gets out of the deal. The article is very much just "Astro, but someone else pays the bills!" which is of course lovely for Astro.
Same reason vercel buys open source... it makes cloudflare always a great deployment option for all Astro sites, which in turn helps cloudflare's core business. For example, Cloudflare released their vite plugin which makes it effortless for frameworks that use the vite env API to run inside workerd (meaning you get to use cloudflare service bindings in dev) back in April and only React Router had support for it. Nex…