Suggestions for a healthy codebase

[rotonde]

Suggestions for a healthy codebase

[maxdeviant]

@cblgh I think that's the best approach to take.

Let a thousand flowers bloom 🌹

[neauoire]

I'd prefer if we did not use libraries, although, we could make a secondary repo with a React client. I know @joperron was working on something along these lines the other night.

[maxdeviant]

@lsjroberts I 100% agree about using Prettier.

I was thinking about the prospect of using React for this as well, especially after seeing #42 and #46. I think the main concern is keeping it accessible for newcomers. I think if we can get React plugged in without needing a build system, then it would be a viable option.

The other alternative would be to have multiple example projects using various technologies so people can choose based on their preference.

[lsjroberts]

I think if we can get React plugged in without needing a build system, then it would be a viable option.

Yeah the build stuff is what I want to avoid.

We could use raw react instead of jsx:

React.createComponent('div', { className: 'hello' }, 'Hello')`

The downside is that is still ~160kb of extra stuff. (About ~50kb gzipped if Beaker does that?)

It does also have some pretty handy error handling stuff we can use in React 16.

But still, it may be sensible to see how far we can get with just standard dom apis. A couple of helper functions should reduce the repetition and be easier to understand for new folks. I wouldn't want to exclude anyone who isn't familiar with React.

The other alternative would be to have multiple example projects using various technologies so people can choose based on their preference.

A good idea, but it would be very hard to maintain feature parity. (site note: I was thinking about doing an example in Elm but more as an example of Beaker API usage in Elm.)

[lsjroberts]

@neauoire Agreed. We should be able to do it without them.

[maxdeviant]

@neauoire Wait until you see what I have up my sleeve for Rotonde 🔮

[neauoire]

I'm excited to see!

[joperron]

We can probably use Preact for this. The overhead in terms of tooling is pretty hefty but once built it's pretty lean and I think the pros outweigh the cons. Will look into it next weekend!

[cblgh]

yeah so just to be clear the rotonde-portal & rotonde-client repos will likely never have any libraries, but a rotonde-portal-preact could be a separate thing and very welcome indeed!

(personally i might build something using choo :3 - we'll see!)

[webdesserts]

I think web components might be a good fit for the Rotonde view layer. Wouldn’t require any third party libraries.