Everbase
Send your site
lovable to astro

Lovable to Astro or Next.js

Turn a Lovable project into a site your team runs

Your Lovable prototype became the website. Now every headline change is a prompt or a pull request, and the pages are assembled in the browser. I move the public site to pages marketing can edit and search can read, in Next.js or Astro, and leave the app where it works.

Send your site

Fixed price from $5,000 typically 4–6 weeks 30 days of hypercare code in your name

The Everbase Stack

Astro or Next.js, with Sanity, on Cloudflare or Vercel.

What moves

What actually migrates.

What you have What happens Why
The repository Stays put Does not move, on purpose. The old platform keeps this because it is the thing it is good at, and the new front end reads from it. Nothing has to be scraped from a published site. The existing project gives me the components, the logic, the assets and the integrations to work from, and what survives depends on whether each part belongs in the new architecture.
Components Reconfigure The same thing, set up again. Nothing is recreated, but it has to be pointed at the new site by hand. Existing React components are useful source material. The interactive ones can stay React inside Astro; the presentational ones are usually simpler to rebuild as Astro components that ship no runtime to the browser.
Routing Rebuild Made again in the new codebase. The old version is a reference, not an import. Client-side routes become Astro pages whose primary content is rendered into the HTML. On a marketing site this is often the architectural change that matters most.
Database and auth Depends Not answerable in general. Which one it is turns on your plan, your export or a decision nobody has made yet. Application state, accounts and real user data stay application infrastructure. Copy, testimonials and FAQs should not need a database because the generated project happened to put them there. If it is genuinely an application, keep it where it is and put the marketing site in front.
URLs Reconfigure The same thing, set up again. Nothing is recreated, but it has to be pointed at the new site by hand. Every known public address is preserved where practical or deliberately redirected.

Boundary

Where the line falls.

Which routes go where

Astro

Routes that are read

  • The home page, pricing and features
  • Resources, docs and the blog
  • Anything a search result points at
  • Rendered before anybody asks for it

The seam

Where one hands to the other

  • A link, for most of them
  • The signed-in handoff, at the product's door
  • Application data read where a public page needs it

Lovable

Routes that are used

  • Sign-in and accounts
  • The dashboard and everything behind it
  • State, records and real user data
  • Still an application, because it is one
One domain. The routes people are sent to become documents; the routes people sign in to stay exactly where they are.

Hard parts

Where this migration gets complicated.

  1. 01

    Generated code has no opinion about structure

    The output works and it was not designed. Components repeat, state is held in odd places, and the same value is fetched three ways, because each prompt solved its own problem. Reading it to find what is load bearing takes longer than rewriting the parts that are not.

  2. 02

    A single-page application can be unnecessary infrastructure for a marketing site

    If most routes exist to be read rather than used, making every visitor boot the application runtime first adds complexity the page may not need. The migration separates the document-like pages from the genuinely interactive product behavior and gives each the architecture it actually needs.

Process

How the migration works.

  1. Audit

    Read what the generator produced and decide which of it is a website and which is an application.

  2. Rebuild

    Components kept where they earn their runtime, rewritten where they do not, and routes become real pages.

  3. Migrate

    Publishing content into the content model, application state left where it belongs, every route rendered and checked.

  4. Hand over

    The repository, the migration map and documentation written for somebody who was not here.

Included

What is included.

  • Design rebuild

    Rebuilt as components, not approximated.

  • Responsive development

    Desktop, tablet and mobile, built and checked.

  • CMS architecture

    Collections and fields mapped before build.

  • Content migration

    Migrated and checked against the source.

  • Asset migration

    Collected, compressed and rehosted.

  • Forms and integrations

    Tested through to the final record.

  • URL coverage

    Every known public address preserved or deliberately redirected.

  • Metadata and canonicals

    Preserved wherever possible.

  • Search footprint preservation

    URLs inventoried before and checked after.

  • Pre-launch QA

    Forms, templates and old URLs verified.

  • Post-launch support

    30 days of indexing and traffic checks included.

After those 30 days, Continuous development is the optional way to keep shipping: $1,000 a month for the Everbase Agent, or $3,500 a month for the Partner Program (human QA on every deploy and one active request at a time), pause or cancel any month.

Search visibility can move during a migration. The goal is to preserve what search engines already understand, and to catch what changed quickly after launch.

And it is yours at the end. The repository sits in your organization rather than mine, the handoff documentation is written for somebody who was not here, and nothing about the project requires me: another developer or your own team can operate it.

Editing

Content should not live in application code because it started there.

  1. 01

    Content Collections, in the repository

    For a team that publishes rarely and is happy in a pull request. The content is files beside the code, typed and checked at build time, with no service to pay for and nothing to keep running. It stops suiting you the day somebody outside engineering needs to publish without help.

  2. 02

    Sanity

    For a team that publishes regularly, or where the person writing is not the person deploying. Editors get a real interface, the model is explicit, and the site reads it at build time. It is another system to configure and pay for, and the modeling is the part that decides whether editors can work on their own.

  3. 03

    No CMS at all

    For a site whose pages change a few times a year. Everything lives in components, changes go through the same review as any other change, and there is no editorial layer to maintain. Honest for a small site, and the wrong answer the moment a blog is added.

Content Collections against a headless CMS, and how the choice is made.

Proof

A migration is not finished when the new site looks right.

  • 01 Codebase

    A codebase your team owns

    Components, routes and styles rebuilt deliberately, not cleaned up from exported markup.

    Verified by Repository and component structure

  • 02 Site

    Everything accounted for

    Collections, content, metadata and existing addresses checked against the source.

    Verified by Source inventory and migration checks

  • 03 Systems

    Handoffs that actually arrive

    Forms, analytics and CRM checked at their destination rather than at the button.

    Verified by Submissions, events and records

The migration is complete when these pass, not when the homepage looks right.

The figures above show the report's shape. Yours are counted from your own site.

See everything included in a migration

Maintenance

From prompting the site to maintaining the codebase.

The important part is not that an agent can write code. It is that the project is structured well enough for its changes to be understood, reviewed and reversed.

  • Marketing

    Editor or AI assistant CMS Preview Publish

    On the headless CMS answer above. Choose content collections instead and this lane runs through the repository and the review with the developers, which is exactly why that decision comes before the rebuild rather than after it.

  • Developers

    Branch Components and routes Review Deploy

    The same workflow as any other repository, which is what makes a second developer able to pick it up.

  • Coding agents

    Project instructions Branch Review Deploy

    Coding agents use the same repository and review process as developers. Instructions explain the patterns; tests and a human review check the changes before release.

Integrations

Changing the frontend doesn't mean changing your stack.

All 24 integration guides

Other guides

Coming from somewhere else?

Or weigh Lovable against a codebase before deciding

Next step

Let me plan your next step.

Send your site

I can scope a migration. Send a brief and I will reply by email with next steps.