reactjs.org VS snapcraft.io

yes, he advocated for Vite in his pr: https://github.com/reactjs/reactjs.org/pull/5487

There have been several calls recently to remove the CRA recommendation, perhaps most notably from popular Twitter use and YouTuber Theo (t3.gg) whose pull request on the reactjs project recommending the replacement of CRA with Vite went viral on Twitter. This sparked heated criticism of CRA, including its perceived lack of features (such as native support for TypeScript or popular CSS library Tailwind), size, performance, and more.

It’s built on Next with tailwind. Check out the beta directory here: https://github.com/reactjs/reactjs.org

Not Docusaurus, but the source is here:

https://github.com/reactjs/reactjs.org (currently in the "beta" directory)

This came up a couple of weeks ago due to a PR opened on the CRA repo asking to kinda deprecate it as the main choice for new React projects. I couldn't help but share my opinion on this as well:

https://github.com/reactjs/reactjs.org/pull/5487#issuecommen...

I remember submitting the full link. Dunno why it was edited

More specifically, the comment: https://github.com/reactjs/reactjs.org/pull/5487#issuecommen...

https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft.io please, stop spreading misinformation about snaps...

Don't like the "proprietarity" of snapcraft? OK, discard it and put flatpak. It will never be banned by Ubuntu. And yes, snapcraft.io available on github.

Probably not, since a feature request for this has been open since 2018.

snapcraft.io - the frontend website, is open source - https://github.com/canonical/snapcraft.io

What is the server code other than "something that distributes a .snap file"? Given that I can, if I want, take a .snap file to an airgapped machine and install it, it appears pretty trivial to offer alternatives to Canonical's infrastructure if anyone were particularly interested.

Snap store - aka snapcraft.io is already open-sourced under GPLv3., see here. Perhaps, you mean not that the code is closed-source but that Canonical won't relinquish any control to the community and will continue to enforce the snap ecosystem as an Apple-style walled-garden? If so, then I completely agree with that assessment. That IMHO is the core of what makes snap an inferior choice for the community.

snapcraft.io (e.g. snap store) has commits going back to Aug 16, 2017. Repo has GPLv3 license.

IMO this is mostly due to higher-ups at Canonical no longer giving a fuck about desktop, less so for the boots on the ground. Wimpress and Pope both left Ubuntu and I don't remember which one said it but one of the 2 had a tweet basically saying as much. But even without that, snaps have been around since at least Dec 11, 2014 and likely even earlier than that. But despite being around for over 8 years, there's still a bunch of common complaints and probably about 30-40% don't sound like they'd take a big company more than 6-12 months to address if they actually worked on it. Things like submitting a patch to the util-linux project to make cli tools like mount/blkid/lsblk/fdisk to make loop devices not be displayed by default (after all they effectively only "break" when snap is installed), following normal dot-prefix conventions in the $HOME folder, adding 1st party support for 3rd party repos (given the nature of FOSS, couldn't they even borrow the logic from flatpak?), adding optimizations to consume less disk space in the majority of scenarios. (I would say to also make snapcraft.io open-source, but after seeing this repo, it appears that common complaint may be off-base)