Funding Open Source: How Webpack Reached $400k+/year

Re:Funding Open Source: How Webpack Reached $400k+/year by untog on Sunday November 05, 2017 @09:51AM (#15629637)

Having to use two loaders (one being loaded by totally non-standard syntax inside the other loader), a plugin (that specifies the output filename nowhere near where the others are specified) and then using a JavaScript require() function to include a CSS file is utterly demented.

I get that's how Webpack users are used to doing it, but when you're new to it (or just coming back to it from a different build system) it's the very definition of insanity.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Funding Open Source: How Webpack Reached $400k+/year by aaron-lebo on Sunday November 05, 2017 @09:59AM (#15629679)

Maybe, but it's understandable after five minutes and you literally have code you can copy and paste. I've seen much worse in basically every other language. We had a 5k line project, after the first day of setup, we've had to touch the webpack config once or twice.

Also, feel free to disagree about the CSS, I think it's a very intuitive way of including assets.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Funding Open Source: How Webpack Reached $400k+/year by untog on Sunday November 05, 2017 @01:25PM (#15630761)

You can copy and paste Webpack config to your heart's content, but actually understanding them is something else.

I thought the breaking API changes with 2.0 would at least accommodate this incredibly common use of a bundler, but no.

[ Parent | on HN ]