iveseenthatAlternative to github pages?
undefinedUse any static site generator and build a Docker container. You could even try out this idea though its lack of http/2+ support might not make it the best option.
HTTP 1.1 is more than good enough for serving a static website.
I think it depends on the number of assets. Generally speaking you’re probably right, but if there are a lot of small files it would be a lot smoother to load them over http/2.
There is zero question about it. It will be absolutely fine for some dude’s static website over a residential internet connection.
Whatever you say bro
Same? HTTP/1.1 ran the entire internet for 20 years and is used by a ton of sites. It’s fine for a personal website.
Rowan ThorpeAlthough I agree with the implied sentiment that “the Perfect is the enemy of the Good Enough” (especially for low-profile personal web-presence) and that naval-gazing about protocols can become a counterproductive rabbit-hole, sometimes it can also be risky to oversimplify in the other direction without at least parenthesizing the caveats too. For example this “HTTP/1.1” site points out how desync attacks make HTTP/1.1 robustness a bit of a game of Whack-a-Mole. For certain sites (even some personal sites) this can occasionally matter.
Obviously someone who has never actually tested 1.1 vs 2 vs 3 lmao
Except I have? In fact I just did so extensively for a few weeks (along with optimizing compression vs CPU time, HTTP 1.1 over the localhost network stack vs UNIX socket, etc).
In fact you two are the first people I’ve ever heard saying that http/2 and http/3 are worse than HTTP 1.1 — what’s the point of developing new, superior protocols if HTTP 1.1 is so perfect? 🥴