I've followed all the main migrations and I've say they where really quite smooth, can't remember having any major issues and each time it tended to be worth it.
reply> Version 3 => 4 => 5 => 6 => 7 => 8.
replyI did the migrations and they were not horrible. A few breaking changes but they were relatively isolated. And the speed and improvements over these versions had been quite significant.
Echoing another person, but we did all those major version migrations without any breakage / churn. What were the breaks you ran into?
reply> It's not as if it is dramatically better now than it was in version 3
replyAdding stuff for SSR was a major improvement.
SSR is a huge pain in the ass. Now it starts to be hard to have all of that do the frontend properly and let good appropriate languages take care of the backend.
replyInstead of a stupid, broken and leaky node equivalent backend totally interlocked with code of the frontend.
I went from 4 to 8 in a single step. I had to change 5 lines of config.
replyCan we please stop the incessant belly-aching over problems that don't exist. I have to question if you even use these tools?
also i'm pretty sure claude can one shot this these days. a non-issue.
replyThe churn is the product.
replyThis makes absolutely zero sense. If you're going to post cynically, at least try to have some sort of coherent point?
replyTooling instability creates the demand for more tooling.
replyThe major change through all of those was solidifying Vite's concepts of "environments" for better SSR support. If you weren't using that, there wasn't much instability.
replySurely lacking features also creates demand for more tooling.