[issue 97] Front-end Framework ADR #236
Conversation
SammySteiner
requested review from
widal001,
lucasmbrown-usds,
acouch and
daphnegold
| - Supports static site generation, server side rendering, and client side rendering | ||
| - Easy to learn and use with good documentation | ||
| - **Cons** | ||
| - Very opinionated framework, especially with routing |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is definitely worth pointing out. But, of course, an opinionated framework is not necessarily a con, especially as a project scales. So many choices you don't have to make. This could just as easily be phrase differently in the "Pros" list. (Just my two cents, having worked in EmberJS quite extensively.)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for pointing that out, and in general I agree that having an opinionated framework can help reduce complexity/decisions.
I updated to add a bit more context. There is discussion of the opinionatedness in it's routing adding a lot of unnecessary code for non standard routes. Not sure if this is even something we'll experience in the project, but it's the one con I see mentioned about Next.js in a lot of places so I thought it worth mentioning.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hmm… I'm not too familiar with the specifics of Next's issues with unusual routing. But, IIRC, the latest release changed quite a lot about how routing works. Might some of those issues have been resolved, or some of the chatter/complaints be old?
Summary
Fixes #97
Time to review: 10
Changes proposed