4 ms·
I've been involved in two separate projects where the backend tech stack choice was essentially "we'll just use Node". Both projects used Express, and it is pr
by metafunctor 11y ago
I've been involved in two separate projects where the backend tech stack choice was essentially "we'll just use Node". Both projects used Express, and it is pretty good, but almost everything else was different.
Both projects had (probably still have) a culture where if someone needed something, they'd first google for an npm, pick something, and just npm install that. Bleeding edge was viewed as a good thing. Kind of reminds me of the times when a new jQuery plugin was added for every little thing.
Soon, both projects will be using a large number of abandoned or obsolete npm packages which have been superseded by even more bleeding edge stuff.
Some day the dust will settle and preferred solutions will emerge for most things. But right now, man, it's a wild west.
- dev360 11y agot0: Yeah man, just use Grunt. t1: Oh no, nobody uses that, use Gulp. t2: Gulp??! Webpack! Maybe Im being ignorant, but I don't remember even Rails being this crazy in its early heyday :)
- mgkimsal 11y agoIf you grew up in it, it may not have seemed crazy. I played with rails 1, ignored 2, came in to a project with 3 RC1. loads of stuff breaking, but "they never do more than 3 RCs - we'll be fine before launch". I think we launched with RC5 (deadline was immovable). Felt to me like half the gems we needed were broken with Rails 3, and the answer was "just go fork it, fix some of these things, and use that". Felt fragile as hell, but the rest of the team acted like this just "how you roll" with Rails. I didn't expect that in something with a v3 on it, but perhaps because it was a major version bump it was more accepted?