At least its maintained, but yeah a lot of old dependencies that are not maintained anymore. Is it worth updating every dependency one by one and try to upgrade the whole thing?
There are upgrade branches but somehow they are stale and not worked on anymore. Probably so hard to and test everything manually that they stoped trying at all. How would you go on a project like this if you were to be the new lead there?
After buy-in from higher-ups and the associated teams, look at the development cycle and build process, how a change goes from local to production.
Add automation around linting, running the test suite, and build & deployment. A lot of it can go in dark, in case there's concern about blocking urgent things. Lay down a skeletal pipeline.
Create a couple template projects, for front- and backend, so future projects can start at the highest quality bar and with latest dependencies.
Partner with QA to collect and document test scenarios. On the frontend, at least you'll be able to mock or stub the backend.
Eventually, you'll want this system to block merges and deployments based on agreed-upon criteria. Exceptions can be made, so long as it's documented.
Throughout, it would be nice to add tests. It's an opportunity to understand the domain with fresh eyes as well.
thanks a lot coronapl. Yeah I really don't like the way Nextjs is only fully compatible with Vercel. Sounds off. Astro is amazing and so simple, such a joy to work with
thank you, really appreciate it that helps me a lot! Currently I would be the only one starting this project and maintaining it. Everyone else is working on php and not transitioning to the forntend. I would be the one in charge to get new frontend devs on board so yeah. I worked with Nextjs a lot and also use Astro a lot for smaller projects
I don't know how much of a success TRACTOR will be, probably not a success at all but the fact that thousands perhaps millions of dollars are spend for that is just a testimony for rusts future. I don't think it will harm rusts reputation more than the rust foundation dramas.
For developers it's always a risk to invest a lot of time in mastering a language. More so if the language to master is rust, a hard one to begin with. But yeah I guess rust devs need to remind themselves that it is worth it and TRACTOR did just that for me
As of yesterday March 30, Google has apparently made some major changes to how it authenticates devices for Youtube and thus broke thousands of Invidious instances that were happily used as a daily driver by thousands of privacy enthusiasts including me. Having Invidious (currently) broken makes me wonder where the cat and mouse wars of big tech and privacy devs are headed to
Will also start to feel the impact. My theory is that we will see a bunch of new video hosting sites as youtube itself attempts to lock down its ecosystem. They haven't paid attention in any adversarial way as far as I can tell.
The business of hosting video is not the hosting itself. It's the ad-driven revenue you can derive, which requires eyeballs first.
Youtube's eyeball count is through the roof compared to any new video hosting site. Content creators will not switch off youtube, unless their revenue from this new site is sufficient compared to what they could've gotten from youtube (or they mirror it - in which case, why would anyone go to this new site?).
I've always wondered how those new sites are supposed to survive when the only people who care enough to be early adopters are also the ones who want to use adblock and tracker blockers.
A lot of the costs scale with the number of eyeballs.
"Content creators will not switch off youtube, unless their revenue from this new site is sufficient compared to what they could've gotten from youtube (or they mirror it - in which case, why would anyone go to this new site?). "
There are alternatives (e.g. Nebula) and a lot of creators like them and do post their content on them to get a higher revenue share. Youtube is squeezing a lot of them. You tube is also a pretty crap user experience too.
There are also people whose videos are primarily not being found through Youtube, and those are not looking for ad revenues. There are also other business models than a revenue share from Youtube.
>There are alternatives (e.g. Nebula) and a lot of creators like them and do post their content on them to get a higher revenue share.
Yes but... (1) Nebula "success" is partially owed to Nebula creators building up audiences on Youtube.
And (2) being on Nebula requires an invitation from that platform to join. You can't just be a random unknown. In contrast, you can be an new unknown creator and start uploading videos to Youtube. Then later, if you're big enough and the quality meets Nebula's standards, they may ask you to join.[1]
Those 2 reasons keep it from being a true "alternative" to Youtube. Nebula is more of an extension platform for the portion of audiences that want to pay extra for longer-form videos of their favorite Youtube creators that happen to be on Nebula.
There are also lots of high-quality Youtube creators (e.g. DIY repair tutorials, etc) who are not on Nebula because it doesn't fit Nebula's "documentary" type of content.
[1] Nebula CEO: >If somebody comes to me and says, “Hey, I’m friends with the creator of this channel and they do really good stuff. I think they would be a good fit,” I will take the call. If I get a cold email from a YouTuber saying, “Hey, I have 100,000 subscribers and I want to be on Nebula,” I don’t reply. : https://www.theverge.com/23076663/nebula-youtube-creator-bus...
It's dumb that it requires switching. Why aren't there any tools or services for publishing content simultaneously to every platform? New platform? Make an account and add it to my publishing tool, done. Now my content posts there as well.
I think it's difficult by design. The platforms don't want that, they want the lock-in and switching costs.
seeding other platforms with your content that was meant to be youtube is fine (i'm sure there are tools that could do this already), but the problem is that those new platforms aren't monetized like youtube is.
For a content creator, if they dilute their audience (by saying that their content is available on some other platform), they might have less views on youtube which is the money maker.
They have rss feeds[0] but it looks like it's more for notifications of new content or creators rather than direct downloads for the videos/podcasts. I don't think they'd implement something like direct downloads but idk.
ETA: Accessing content on nebula, I have my feed of videos from the creators to which I subscribe and I select videos to watch from there. It's basic but as someone who never got into watching youtube (I bookmarked channels on invidious instances and looked for new videos there) it's pretty good. They're also open to feature requests and are improving the site.
While Firefox doesn't surface them anymore, I checked the page source and there are indeed per-channel feeds. They don't have direct video URLs, but yt-dlp claims to support Nebula, so you may be able to automate it.
