flux-standard-action VS flux

I am not sure where exactly the payload field comes from, but it is a feature of flux stand actions which is a standard for flux actions (redux is inspired by flux).

flux-standard-action

So Flux architecture with the concept of Stores, Dispatchers, and Actions came about (from React team), and then Redux (a simplified version of Flux - for juniors by a junior).

Flux Homepage

Then came Flux.

So the basic fundamental of state management is to cache recurring data which is to be passed along a lot of component hierarchy. Input/Props drilling is one the issue where state management methodology like flux comes to resort. A central global store that will act as hydration of data to our components and probably act as single source to truth for many entities in your application.

https://github.com/gaearon/flux-react-router-examplehttp://ianobermiller.com/blog/2014/09/15/react-and-flux-interview/https://github.com/facebook/flux

Throughout the examples and explanations of Flux architecture -- Facebook's counterpart to React -- action type names are referenced as enum constants rather than strings. (See examples at http://facebook.github.io/flux/) I am just looking for an articulation of why this is the preferred method.

Flux. Redux's claim to fame was capturing Flux's functionality in a simpler API.

I'm reading about Flux but the example Todo app is too simplistic for me to understand some key points.

You should look into the Flux architecture pattern. It provides a clear structure for managing application state, and there are libraries out there that implement the pattern that you can use if you don't want to roll your own state management solution.