Components should not rely on Redux

[aztecrex]

Components should not rely on Redux

[fiddlerwoaroof]

I generally design components for packages/visual-stack to not do any state management, because I don't want to have to think about inconsistency between the state the component's user expects and the internal state of the component.

Perhaps we could create a second package like visual-stack-redux that provides versions of visual-stack components that handle this sort of state using local state?

[aztecrex]

100% disagree. If a component has a visual behavior, it should be encapsulated. If that requires the component to have mutable state, then the responsibility for managing it is with the component. This is the essence of encapsulation. Forcing a component user to add additional dependencies and code just to get a component to work is a cognitive load that simply doesn't scale.

A component user should be able to drop the component in place and not have to care about how it works. If a user is going try and impose their own state changes on that component, that user is breaking encapsulation so buyer beware. They should probably wrap the component instead. If a component allows a user to change its state, it must expose that through a well-documented, cohesive interface, not allow a user to directly modify the state based on inappropriate knowledge of the internals.