4 ms·
I think this argument is about free vs. not-free frameworks. Frameworks that are supported by a company and actively developed are far superior to the state of
by sbf501 4y ago
I think this argument is about free vs. not-free frameworks. Frameworks that are supported by a company and actively developed are far superior to the state of NPM open source right now (thinking of Qt vs Electron and my 7 year battle with both).
It is no fun when an open-source framework pushes a new major version, then deprecates the version you were on, or dependencies fail to find matching version, and you beg github developers to fix the bug and your issue sits open for months and is then closed with no warning.
- DrewADesign 4y agoI think some of your experiences can be explained by your citing NPM as representative of FOSS. Not that there's anything wrong with the astonishing breadth of functionality available in the NPM ecosystem, but stability isn't its strongest comparative suit. OTOH, Django, which was cited by the author, just doesn't have that kind of volatility in its base features.
- tbrownaw 4y ago> Not that there's anything wrong with the astonishing breadth of functionality available in the NPM ecosystem There are at least two things wrong. One is those things is missing standard functionality (eg, leftpad), and the other is a failure to maintain appropriate hubris (eg, is_even).
- DrewADesign 4y agoI don't think those are criticisms of the repository, are they? They seem like criticisms of modern Javascript.
- sbf501 4y agoTrue. I should have been more clear because NPM =/= FOSS.
- john61 4y agoAnd it is no fun when the manager of the company developing your proprietary framework decides to tank it because of a change in strategy or the competitor buys the company and stops development. Since you have no source code you are forced to do what the commercial interest of foreigners dictate.