4 ms·

Each successive post of the recent set from meteor just seems to be bringing it further towards resembling the features of a GraphQL > Relay > React stack - in

Each successive post of the recent set from meteor just seems to be bringing it further towards resembling the features of a GraphQL > Relay > React stack - in fact actually using React, and now it seems, GraphQL. This is great because the promise of a stack like this is very exciting, but I am left wondering what is meteor promising to bring that isn't just bundling some modules, and re-implementing Relay? I can't see anything in the list of what we are planning to build that isn't already offered by Relay, or on Relay's roadmap. Not that a different implementation isn't a great thing, competition is always advantageous, but my understanding is that Meteor is a for-profit company whose product is their framework - it seems quite odd therefore that their plan for that framework appears to be to just piece together and/or re-implement an already-existing, well-used and well-known stack of completely open-source libraries, that aren't at all difficult to piece together as it is. What's their strategy here?

primigenus 11y ago
To be "The Javascript App Platform", as displayed prominently on the Meteor homepage. If you build an app with Javascript, MDG want you to build it with Meteor. In order for you to do that you need to trust that you can use the tools you want to, and derive benefits from the fact that the stack is designed to work as a single platform. So if GraphQL is where it's at, it makes sense to design a place for it in Meteor.
- davnicwil 11y ago
  Well yes, that's their general goal, but hasn't the developing React stack already won on that front? It frankly seems they at least believe it has, as it appears their plan is to take it, bundle it together under one name and re-implement some parts. The question is then, why would anyone on the React stack, which has become so popular, switch to Meteor? The stack of libraries Facebook has already put out there (not to mention third party libraries such as Redux) are designed to work together, and do so easily and very well - people are familiar with them and already using them. I suppose the only dimension on which they could coax people over from the existing React stack, Relay in particular, is by developing its feature set faster and better than Facebook can. For what it's worth I think it's a good thing, I just find it pretty intriguing if that's their play - going up against the popular tide and basically directly competing with Facebook on bundling together their own libraries. Will be great to watch their progress!
  - primigenus 11y ago
    Has it won? Where can I go and write `react-stack create my-new-project` and get a guaranteed working integration of the various elements that make up the stack, including a working server environment, pre-installed and configured database, and all of the other inbetweens that come with Meteor (such as DDP, livequery, Tracker, Blaze, ReactiveVar, etc)? The "React" stack has certainly been an up and coming potential competitor for Meteor, but until Facebook or someone else actually shows signs of preparing the kind of integrated development experience that Meteor ships with out of the box, I don't think it's really similar. So that's what they're doing: tying together the best of the Javascript ecosystem, which happens to currently include a couple of projects by Facebook, into one cohesive whole that "just works".
    - vpears87 11y ago
      Agree. React is a library. Meteor could complement React as a framework much like angular.
    - rapind 11y ago
      Is "react-stack create my-new-project" really preferable to something like "git clone git@github.com:react-stacks/react-firebase-template.git my-new-project" ? I'm sold on the latter, since often enough I'll customize and publish my own tweaked templates as I become enamoured with different tech.
  - girvo 11y ago
    I'm a React fanboy, and use it and React Native in production on some pretty large apps. However, Meteor adopting React (and related tooling) still has merit, as to build those projects required me to wire them all together, enforce convention for the other developers using it so that we didn't try to use the tools in ways they weren't intended, and work around the various issues that crop up when doing Unviersal Javascript. Meteor can solve all of these, and can market themselves as that integrated solution. We all win, in that case.
    - Keats 11y ago
holonio 11y ago
I think one of the biggest reasons for why it still makes sense to have a monolithic framework is server-aware React components. Most SPAs and React applications re-use tons of stuff like login pages, news feeds, etc. Most of the time, we can re-use some of the frontend UI stuff but end up having to hook it up with our backend manually. But, if we used Meteor, the components can interact with the server side. This allows us to do stuff like use "<Login />" and just have a login page that works, in terms of both frontend and backend. The point is that Meteor's goal should be to allow people to build abstractions and re-useable that can step over the client-server barrier. That's pretty much only possible when you make assumptions about server and client, i.e. a monolithic framework.
dfischer 11y ago
In the end it's about the UX from Meteor's side. If they can take all these technologies and make it very easy to work with (without all the annoying boilerplate setup, etc) then it's a big win.

primigenus 11y ago

To be "The Javascript App Platform", as displayed prominently on the Meteor homepage. If you build an app with Javascript, MDG want you to build it with Meteor. In order for you to do that you need to trust that you can use the tools you want to, and derive benefits from the fact that the stack is designed to work as a single platform. So if GraphQL is where it's at, it makes sense to design a place for it in Meteor.

davnicwil 11y ago
Well yes, that's their general goal, but hasn't the developing React stack already won on that front? It frankly seems they at least believe it has, as it appears their plan is to take it, bundle it together under one name and re-implement some parts. The question is then, why would anyone on the React stack, which has become so popular, switch to Meteor? The stack of libraries Facebook has already put out there (not to mention third party libraries such as Redux) are designed to work together, and do so easily and very well - people are familiar with them and already using them. I suppose the only dimension on which they could coax people over from the existing React stack, Relay in particular, is by developing its feature set faster and better than Facebook can. For what it's worth I think it's a good thing, I just find it pretty intriguing if that's their play - going up against the popular tide and basically directly competing with Facebook on bundling together their own libraries. Will be great to watch their progress!
- primigenus 11y ago
  Has it won? Where can I go and write `react-stack create my-new-project` and get a guaranteed working integration of the various elements that make up the stack, including a working server environment, pre-installed and configured database, and all of the other inbetweens that come with Meteor (such as DDP, livequery, Tracker, Blaze, ReactiveVar, etc)? The "React" stack has certainly been an up and coming potential competitor for Meteor, but until Facebook or someone else actually shows signs of preparing the kind of integrated development experience that Meteor ships with out of the box, I don't think it's really similar. So that's what they're doing: tying together the best of the Javascript ecosystem, which happens to currently include a couple of projects by Facebook, into one cohesive whole that "just works".
  - vpears87 11y ago
    Agree. React is a library. Meteor could complement React as a framework much like angular.
  - rapind 11y ago
    Is "react-stack create my-new-project" really preferable to something like "git clone git@github.com:react-stacks/react-firebase-template.git my-new-project" ? I'm sold on the latter, since often enough I'll customize and publish my own tweaked templates as I become enamoured with different tech.
- girvo 11y ago
  I'm a React fanboy, and use it and React Native in production on some pretty large apps. However, Meteor adopting React (and related tooling) still has merit, as to build those projects required me to wire them all together, enforce convention for the other developers using it so that we didn't try to use the tools in ways they weren't intended, and work around the various issues that crop up when doing Unviersal Javascript. Meteor can solve all of these, and can market themselves as that integrated solution. We all win, in that case.
  - Keats 11y ago

holonio 11y ago

I think one of the biggest reasons for why it still makes sense to have a monolithic framework is server-aware React components. Most SPAs and React applications re-use tons of stuff like login pages, news feeds, etc. Most of the time, we can re-use some of the frontend UI stuff but end up having to hook it up with our backend manually. But, if we used Meteor, the components can interact with the server side. This allows us to do stuff like use "<Login />" and just have a login page that works, in terms of both frontend and backend. The point is that Meteor's goal should be to allow people to build abstractions and re-useable that can step over the client-server barrier. That's pretty much only possible when you make assumptions about server and client, i.e. a monolithic framework.

dfischer 11y ago

In the end it's about the UX from Meteor's side. If they can take all these technologies and make it very easy to work with (without all the annoying boilerplate setup, etc) then it's a big win.