Is there any way to make a Node.js site static?

Discussion
21

Channing said:
@Vic
This read heavily as sarcasm to me, and judging by the downvotes, it didn’t to them. But I breathed through my nose.

100% sarcasm. Sad that isn’t obvious. Thank you for appreciating it!

I actually did an interview once - the task was to build a webpage that parsed a CSV and displayed the data and allowed the user to sort it in a couple different ways. I built it as a static site. The interviewer opposed hiring me because I didn’t do the joke I said above. Half the company were former colleagues of mine and 100% agreed with me. He got a lot of flak for it, but it was his call whether to hire me. But yes, I am a little salty about people who like to over-engineer things.

22

@Nova
I have used GH Actions for Jekyll websites and other things but not for a Node.js project.

I can’t find any tutorials about it online, so that’s why I came here.

Everything I read told me Node.js can’t be used with GH Pages.

23

@Lennon

Everything I read told me Node.js can’t be used with GH Pages.

GH Pages can’t host a Node.js server, but what everyone is trying to ask you is: is it actually a Node.js server, or is it a Node.js site generator that outputs static HTML? If it’s the latter you just need to run the generator on your own computer and upload the static HTML to GitHub.

24

@Lennon
Not possible? So this NPM package designed specifically to do so won’t work?

There may not be a dedicated Action for generating the content, but it can still be done. Actions are quite versatile. You’d just have to do it custom instead.

Build the static site → Stash it in the correct branch → then GH Pages should pick it up.

25

Keep in mind Node.js is required in order to compile a React or Angular app. That does NOT mean that Node needs to be installed on the server. So like others have said, reach out to the dev and get clarification on what was built. It is entirely possible that the output build is a set of static HTML / JS / CSS files which can be deployed to GitHub pages, and Node is only required to run the build (or to run the site locally for development).

26

Is there a build folder? Is it using express? What dependencies is it using? Post the repo and we can help.

27

I’m sure it’s possible, but we need a bit more info on the project, and perhaps some of the code.

28

Jody said:
I’m sure it’s possible, but we need a bit more info on the project, and perhaps some of the code.

I can try posting the code but what kind of information do you need?

29

Lennon said:

Jody said:
I’m sure it’s possible, but we need a bit more info on the project, and perhaps some of the code.

I can try posting the code but what kind of information do you need?

The package.json would really help.

30

Lennon said:

Jody said:
I’m sure it’s possible, but we need a bit more info on the project, and perhaps some of the code.

I can try posting the code but what kind of information do you need?

A screenshot of the structure of folders/files would help identify what’s going on without giving away code.

Ideally, after/during the Node.js bit running.

31

Welcome to modern web development. Fucks sake, I’m a developer as I hate this kind of mindset. Was it that hard for the guy to just make a plain HTML file?

About the deployment, it all depends on what was done and how it was done. You should contact the guy and tell him that this wasn’t what you asked for.

32

@Jesse
lol yea I don’t get it… how hard would it be.

33

@Jesse
Yes, it’s my fault. I should only have paid them after the website was deployed.

I’m trying to figure out if there is a way I can fix this issue without having to hire a new developer.

34

Lennon said:
@Jesse
Yes, it’s my fault. I should only have paid them after the website was deployed.

I’m trying to figure out if there is a way I can fix this issue without having to hire a new developer.

Try to pressure the guy into doing something about it. It’s your best option.

35

@Jesse
Why build it in plain boring HTML, CSS, and JS (what no typescript) when you can install a bloated mess of a Next.js site, tailwind, shadcn, and a bunch of random other hype NPM packages to serve a plain old webpage using those old technologies above.

I do actually like and use those tools but kind of feel like the newer crop of devs just listen to whatever dev influencer tells them is the next best tool without paying attention to the project requirements because why make something simple when you can overcomplicate the shit out of it?

36

@Verne
I mean, I’d still use Tailwind at a minimum, but yeah. Many reach for packages as their first solution to any problem (real or imagined) without even thinking about just doing the thing directly.

37

@Verne
I don’t see any proof that this was the case; are there more info somewhere else?

38

Bay said:
@Verne
I don’t see any proof that this was the case; are there more info somewhere else?

I was being sarcastic dude.

39

@Jesse
Probably that dev was not comfortable with raw-dogging it with vanilla tools. DX and productivity are much better once you are used to the framework(s).

40

@Jesse
Yea, a one-page website I understand; I would’ve just used an HTML file and be done with it. But 11ty is my go-to static site generator; it’s an absolute beast that makes static web development extremely efficient for any projects.