3 ms·

I built a full-stack JS framework [1] that I thought would be a hit. As best as I can tell, because it lacks the complexity/word salad of existing solutions, it

I built a full-stack JS framework [1] that I thought would be a hit. As best as I can tell, because it lacks the complexity/word salad of existing solutions, it's mostly been ignored despite being (imo) an elegant solution to a long-standing problem. [1] https://cheatcode.co/joystick https://cheatcode.co/joystick

j45 2y ago
This is an inviting read, and I think would resonate with many. I avoid javascript for the brittle timesuck it can become maintianing the past while shaking one's fist at other legacy systems. I've never known this to be a problem because I avoid systems that do this to my time, unless it's absolutely unavoidable. It makes me much more productive to use tools that work, and continue to work, so I spend more time with problems than rolling a temple to my own veneration. It might work for others, and it doesn't make it right, it might not work for me, and that doesn't make it wrong. It's OK not to be for everyone, but your people will find whoever you are being. Maybe try it as the content for your landing page. Lots of one liners that resonate.
- rglover 2y ago
  Thanks for the feedback/tips, I'll give it a shot.
  - j45 2y ago
    My comment was in relation to the philosophy page of your framework. I thought I had included it. https://docs.cheatcode.co/joystick/philosophy https://docs.cheatcode.co/joystick/philosophy I hope you do, I'm sure there would be at least an audience of 1000 true fans for this. Its one of the only javascript frameworks that stood out to me because of that page having a real enough human story. Feels similar to the individual developer starting a project wondering if any framework is looking out for them to stay productive :) I generally avoid the javascript brittle maintenance time-sinks but using it is a reality and knowing that there's simple frameworks that can absorb and handle complexity are valid.
degurechaff 2y ago
I think not using common license like GPL, BSD or MIT make people think twice before even trying the framework.
- rglover 2y ago
  The license is pretty straightforward and fills in the gaps where the others fail to protect OSS creators (leading to headaches like w/ Redis). Perhaps it's too idealistic to think people will just read it and see if it matches their needs?
  - golergka 2y ago
    I'm not a lawyer, so I'm not risking my company's legal liability with my ability to comprehend a legal document.
    - rglover 2y ago
      Assuming the project/tool was interesting and that was a concern, why not just forward it to your legal department (or manager) to get clarification on if it's an option?
      - tirpen 2y ago
        And then you have to wait a month and more and they log time on your project budget. Legal department takes that kind of stuff seriously and don't give off the cuff opinions. So now your project is severely delayed you are under budget and the only thing you got from it is that you maybe gets permission to use a new library. Ooooor... you can just pick one of hundreds of options with a more commonly used licenses that have already been approved by them many years ago.
      - photonthug 2y ago
        This is not realistic. You’re asking new users to go out on a limb to even figure out if they can work with your stuff. the casual “hey send an email to legal” suggestion just cost your potential collaborators weeks of time and thousands of dollars before they can even evaluate the product itself
sesm 2y ago
What's the long-standing problem and what's the idea behind an elegant solution?

j45 2y ago

This is an inviting read, and I think would resonate with many. I avoid javascript for the brittle timesuck it can become maintianing the past while shaking one's fist at other legacy systems. I've never known this to be a problem because I avoid systems that do this to my time, unless it's absolutely unavoidable. It makes me much more productive to use tools that work, and continue to work, so I spend more time with problems than rolling a temple to my own veneration. It might work for others, and it doesn't make it right, it might not work for me, and that doesn't make it wrong. It's OK not to be for everyone, but your people will find whoever you are being. Maybe try it as the content for your landing page. Lots of one liners that resonate.

rglover 2y ago
Thanks for the feedback/tips, I'll give it a shot.
- j45 2y ago
  My comment was in relation to the philosophy page of your framework. I thought I had included it. https://docs.cheatcode.co/joystick/philosophy https://docs.cheatcode.co/joystick/philosophy I hope you do, I'm sure there would be at least an audience of 1000 true fans for this. Its one of the only javascript frameworks that stood out to me because of that page having a real enough human story. Feels similar to the individual developer starting a project wondering if any framework is looking out for them to stay productive :) I generally avoid the javascript brittle maintenance time-sinks but using it is a reality and knowing that there's simple frameworks that can absorb and handle complexity are valid.

degurechaff 2y ago

I think not using common license like GPL, BSD or MIT make people think twice before even trying the framework.

rglover 2y ago
The license is pretty straightforward and fills in the gaps where the others fail to protect OSS creators (leading to headaches like w/ Redis). Perhaps it's too idealistic to think people will just read it and see if it matches their needs?
- golergka 2y ago
  I'm not a lawyer, so I'm not risking my company's legal liability with my ability to comprehend a legal document.
  - rglover 2y ago
    Assuming the project/tool was interesting and that was a concern, why not just forward it to your legal department (or manager) to get clarification on if it's an option?
    - tirpen 2y ago
      And then you have to wait a month and more and they log time on your project budget. Legal department takes that kind of stuff seriously and don't give off the cuff opinions. So now your project is severely delayed you are under budget and the only thing you got from it is that you maybe gets permission to use a new library. Ooooor... you can just pick one of hundreds of options with a more commonly used licenses that have already been approved by them many years ago.
    - photonthug 2y ago
      This is not realistic. You’re asking new users to go out on a limb to even figure out if they can work with your stuff. the casual “hey send an email to legal” suggestion just cost your potential collaborators weeks of time and thousands of dollars before they can even evaluate the product itself

sesm 2y ago

What's the long-standing problem and what's the idea behind an elegant solution?