0xblinq

You do have to upgrade. At some point incompatibilities between libraries arise, and if neglected for too long at some point it becomes impossible to update everything. Keeping dependencies up to date is an important part of software maintenance.

Take one more sir.

This is all about download counts and who's more popular. That's it.

Yet another mess, once again.

All of this just so that they can brag that their framework has more stars/downloads than Next.js, because there's no other reason to do this than to "show" who's more popular.

And while it's true react-router has a shitload of downloads, most of those downloads are for really old versions, because people can't update due to all the constant rewrites and changes of APIs. I've seen this at 3 companies already, nobody is using the latest versions.

NPM should show download metrics by version (as packagist does for PHP packages). I'm convinced this will prove it.

But hey, this works. Now they have more downloads than Next so let's use this instead.

(BTW, Remix was still a better option than Next in my opinion, but that's a super low bar)

oh noes!

It’s going to take some time but it’s going to take over.

Next really fucked up with the app router, and people are realizing everything is just a trap to get more customers on vercel.

+1

I’ve been using remix for the last 6 months and I’m super happy with it.

LOL

I've worked with both, Laravel and Django, for many many years.

Laravel is miles ahead of Django, in every single aspect. The template system is incredible while the django one is stuck in the 90s. The integrated job queues, scheduling, asset bundling, etc, etc. And yes, you also have Admin interfaces for Laravel, both paid and free, and they're as good or even better depending how you look at them. Community is also a lot bigger which means more packages and better maintained.

And what prevents these aggregator apps from having different settings for each network?

Author's code is vulnerable to timing attacks and probably others as well.

This is why people should use established backend frameworks such as Laravel/Django/Rails if they really want to focus on their product and not on reinventing the square wheel.

> before going straight to the Next.js or Remix behemoths where we'll have 45min builds pulling in thousands of NPM dependencies over half a million files in node_modules.

You sound unhappy as well, and you also sound like you're doing something terribly wrong here.

My experience with people following the HTMX hype is backend developers annoyed by JavaScript not being perfect and node_modules size.

node_modules is never that big, and even if it is it's not a problem as big as maintaining complicated (i.e. not trivial) projects with these tools.

At the end of the day it depends mostly on your skills and the requirements for the project you're working on. As I said if you have some UX experience and you care about loading states, page transitions, animations and in general the little details then something built with these tools will be unmaintainable by anyone other than the person that implemented it in the first place.

node_modules too big? so what? that's not all of it shipped to the browser and I have plenty of space on my computer. A mess of html attributes, logic split between jquery, backend, html attributes, etc? Now that's a bigger problem.

And why I said "hype"? Well, because people suddenly see it as the greatest thing ever because some youtubers/podcasters made it popular, when there've been similar solutions for ages and nobody cared (i.e. Unpoly). But if the right youtuber talks about it, then boom! Everyone is saying everything should be done this way from now on.

As I said in another comment, the idea is great and I like it. But as the creator of the library said MANY times: It's not a replacement for component based frameworks. It's a great tool for the simpler use cases where react/vue/etc would be overkill.

My rant is about people acting as this is the future for everything, which again, the author of the library itself says it's not, and he's a smart guy.

From what I can see from the demo that's a super simple application. It might make sense to use a tool such as htmx/unpoly/hotwire/etc.

What I don't get is people just blindly "following the hype" (as with anything else) and assuming it's a replacement for client side frameworks (react, vue, etc) for anything you might need out there. You already said this several times in some Podcasts I listen to, so I don't blame you. But people are just "hey bro just use HTMX and Go and done". And that might be fine if you're a backend developer that doesn't like JavaScript and have a very simple use case and probably don't have high UX standards or picky designers chasing you with every animation, loading state or performance issue.

There are many projects out there with pretty complex UX logic where this will just not work, and if it works the end result is going to be much harder to maintain. Let's not take into account finding people willing to work with these tools (already happened to us where we had to move a Rails/Hotwire project to Rails/Inertia) because no one could work on the frontend, initially created by a backend dev and that became such a mess not even him could maintain it anymore).

But again, it is not the technology to blame (it's great!), it is the usage of it. And people can misuse anything, as they misuse react/vue/etc when they're building just a landing page.

If all you have to do is render a form you don't even need HTMX. IF your project is just about rendering forms then fine.

That won't happen. That's not a priority for them and goes against their business interests.

In fact, there are already many intentional limitations that makes Next a very bad choice if you're self hosting.

proof: https://github.com/vercel/next.js/discussions/46722

Agree with this. Remix is a thousand times better than Next.

We migrated our main application to Remix and couldn't be happier. The app router stuff is such a mess.

LOL. The HTMX hype is worse than every other fashionable framework.

Only backend developers like it. As soon as you have to do anything minimally complex it's just terrible.

This is the "Hyped" stack, not the "Right" stack.

From all of this, the worst decision is to use Next. Vendor lock in, developed by one of the most shady companies right now, and full of problems.

As a full time JavaScript developer for the last ~8 years (with some previous Django experience), getting into Laravel has been one of the best things that have happened to me in my professional life.

It's so refreshing to have such a wonderful, well maintained and "batteries included" framework where I can focus on getting things done instead of taking thousands of decisions on non important stuff, tying libraries together and reinventing the wheel every time.

I'm now getting into Livewire + Folio/Volt and damn, feels like cheating for real.

People should be more careful when picking names. I know it’s its difficult, but still.

This sounds extremely bad in Spanish, to the point I wouldn’t be able to use something like this at my company just because of how it sounds and the connotations it has.

And in practical real life terms (where teams and long term projects and people coming and leaving the team over years and different skill levels, etc) is how CSS becomes a write-only mess.

Tailwind is primarily a way to do "css-in-js", except it's "css-in-html". It might not look nice on the eye but it's fucking easier to maintain, safer to remove, etc. As long as you have a way to create "components" you're fine.

> Coming up with css class names is not hard.

Yes, unless you work alone on your tiny 2 weeks old side project, it's fucking hard.

They're different things IMHO.

Bootstrap gives you a pre-made look and feel that you can use despite knowing CSS or not and maybe you can customize a bit, make a theme, etc. Bootstrap is more like "Tailwind UI" which is different thing from Tailwind (the tool).

To use plain Tailwind (without Tailwind UI) you do need to know CSS. It's just like a "CSS-in-JS" tool, except it's "CSS-in-HTML" this time.

I think it's been the same situation with React. Everyone hated JSX when it first came out, then people realized the benefits outweigh the drawbacks.

+1. I’m also using it and it’s truly refreshing after so many unnecessary SPAs. The latest generation of js meta frameworks made me switch and I’m so much happier with Livewire.

+1

The ecosystem is unmatched.

It’s the framework of the week because now it’s when it’s getting popular, gaining traction and everyone is trying it out. Not because of how long has been in the make.

While I like and use Remix I do agree with your prediction about its future. Sadly.

I’m one of those using remix and I do like it a lot, but I don’t have much hope. I wish I’m wrong but probably in a couple years we’ll be all hating it. I also liked next a lot in the early days. Somehow they always manage to fuck yo and nothing reaches “Rails” levels of stability/popularity in the js world.

Everyone thinks their preferred stack is the best in the world and should be used by everyone for everything and everything else is wrong.

It’s so funny.

At work we are using Inertia.js as an interface between React and Rails (inertia is just a tiny library/protocol that lets you use React or Vue replacing your mvc framework templates)

Check it out, it’s really nice.