-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.2k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Differences between RTK and Rematch #560
Comments
I don't think I need to "justify" this project's existence:
I'm happy to discuss differing tradeoffs and such, but I also don't see a need to spend time writing up comparisons with other tools in the docs, especially given that I have a ton of other docs work I'm currently trying to focus on. (I will also note that Rematch does not have very much usage, overall, while Redux Toolkit's adoption is growing rapidly.) But, if you'd like to know why it exists and what problems it's trying to solve, please see: I will say, I'm curious: why are you being asked to migrate to Rematch, specifically? |
I'm gonna jump on this and add two points:
|
@markerikson That "justify" in the title is a copy-paste for the issue title in Rematch. Clearly neither need to justify anything. What I really meant, and would like to establish, is the differences between the two in such way that someone can make an educated decision on why to pick that one or the other. I also don't think you should be writing this. I was hoping for different people to chip in - like the (great) comment @phryneas left. |
See twin issue on the Rematch repo: Differences between Rematch and Redux Toolkit (rtk)
I feel it is only appropriate to ask the same here.
Would be really useful for people to understand the pro/cons and philosophy behind each.
I've been over the moon with RTK, but now we're asked to migrate to Rematch and it's hard to make a case because neither frameworks mention the other in the docs.
This may not be a proper issue alright, because I'm not sure product comparison should be part of the docs.
But I'm sure those interested will stumble upon this issue.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: