ninja_gn_binaries VS oak

Attempt to fix the first one... and bang! It's using the platform to call a python script that pulls platform binaries from here:

https://github.com/denoland/ninja_gn_binaries/

And there's no FreeBSD build there. To much yak shaving for idle curiosity on my part.

Are you using Oak? If not you should check it out https://oakserver.github.io/oak/

oak

oak - web framework

Hey @cjonas, I'm a developer on Supabase Edge Functions team. We do have plans to improve the current database trigger behavior. Will share more updates on this in the coming months.

Can you explain what do you mean by template URLs? Do you mean route params like `/v1/functions/users/:id`? If so, you can use a framework like Oak[1] to handle them. Edge Functions will make the full path including querystring available to the router.

Source maps, is it broken during local dev or when you deploy the function? Also, by broken you mean in a stack trace the file / line numbers aren't accurate?

[1] https://github.com/oakserver/oak

Oak framework [Website]

If you don’t want to use a full stack framework, you can develop your frontend and backend separately. With Cloudflare, you can serve your frontend and static assets with Pages or Workers Sites. With Deno Deploy, you can serve static assets from the filesystem. As for the backend, you probably want to use an HTTP framework such as Sunder (if you target Cloudflare Workers), oak, Router, or Sift (if you target Deno Deploy).

Oak server - middleware framework for Deno's native HTTP server. 'destjs' use it under the hood.

The issue about resources vanishing does happen, e.g. this example, meaning things like CI outages / non-deterministic builds / etc are possible, especially under a decentralized package hosting model.

Here's an example that uses Oak, a web application framework for Deno, to create a basic web server: