3 ms·

So you're saying that we finally have a semi-stable toolchain (I disagree) and the correct path forward is to change it all again? Lol I think the cynicism is v

So you're saying that we finally have a semi-stable toolchain (I disagree) and the correct path forward is to change it all again? Lol I think the cynicism is very much justified.

debazel 1y ago
It doesn't seem like this project is intended to replace the existing tools, but rather combine them into a more convenient bundle.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
ownagefool 1y ago
To be fair, the idea of the tools being standardized behind a single command like golang is nice, but this is largely what it all comes down to. "Vite+ will be source-available and offers a generous free tier." I'm also a developer ( sometimes ) and we need to eat. However, for me these tools are too low of a level of he stack to monetize, so I'll probably stick with my collection of free tools.
- jansan 1y ago
  Evan You wrote on Twitter that source code will be accessible to everyone, but not under a full permissible license. He also wrote that they have no plans to sell any code licenses.
  - runako 1y ago
    > they have no plans to sell any code licenses Every for-profit is subject to being sold to someone with different plans. If the license is not fully open, it's not smart to expect the licensing terms to get worse.
    - TheAlexLichter 1y ago
      Selling access isn't really helpful there. The target group (companies) have to care about licenses at some point, while it will be free for OSS, individuals and the community.
    - Muromec 1y ago
      Every non-profit is subject to be neglected and overtaken by state sponsored psyops campaign from the GMT+3 timezone.
egorfine 1y ago
For the web development world, the answer seems a strong yes. I remember gulp/grunt saga, I remember webpack 5 saga and the most recent pain with eslint 8 → 9 is a final nail in the coffin of anything stable for web building.

3 ms·

So you're saying that we finally have a semi-stable toolchain (I disagree) and the correct path forward is to change it all again? Lol I think the cynicism is v

by 0x696C6961 1y ago

So you're saying that we finally have a semi-stable toolchain (I disagree) and the correct path forward is to change it all again? Lol I think the cynicism is very much justified.

debazel 1y ago
It doesn't seem like this project is intended to replace the existing tools, but rather combine them into a more convenient bundle.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
ownagefool 1y ago
To be fair, the idea of the tools being standardized behind a single command like golang is nice, but this is largely what it all comes down to. "Vite+ will be source-available and offers a generous free tier." I'm also a developer ( sometimes ) and we need to eat. However, for me these tools are too low of a level of he stack to monetize, so I'll probably stick with my collection of free tools.
- jansan 1y ago
  Evan You wrote on Twitter that source code will be accessible to everyone, but not under a full permissible license. He also wrote that they have no plans to sell any code licenses.
  - runako 1y ago
    > they have no plans to sell any code licenses Every for-profit is subject to being sold to someone with different plans. If the license is not fully open, it's not smart to expect the licensing terms to get worse.
    - TheAlexLichter 1y ago
      Selling access isn't really helpful there. The target group (companies) have to care about licenses at some point, while it will be free for OSS, individuals and the community.
    - Muromec 1y ago
      Every non-profit is subject to be neglected and overtaken by state sponsored psyops campaign from the GMT+3 timezone.
egorfine 1y ago
For the web development world, the answer seems a strong yes. I remember gulp/grunt saga, I remember webpack 5 saga and the most recent pain with eslint 8 → 9 is a final nail in the coffin of anything stable for web building.