sill VS onyxia-web

True. However, sometimes large buyers, such as governments or enterprises, change their policies towards purchasing requirements. For example, since 2013 France has had an Inter-Ministry Foundation of Free Software[0], which provides the preferred software to be used across France's government, as French law requires preference be given to free software (logiciel libre).

What impact might occur if a government like France were to require in the future only RISC V architectures with free boot loaders, of if the US government or a large corporation required use of measured boot to see at boot-time if the boot code or subsequent OS had been compromised?

With persistent threat actors and the falling price of processing power, I wouldn't be surprised if in the next ten years some larger organizations (or tens of thousands of small businesses) start demanding this kind if IT security from their vendors.

[0] (in French, of course) https://sill.etalab.gouv.fr/fr/software and their repo, https://github.com/disic/sill.

On the contrary, in my experience it is the approach that scales best. (Not so )big example.

In favor of i18nifty: - typesafe-i18n translations are flat string, i18nifty on the other hand enables to involve logic and React components in your translations. You can't write this or that with typesafe-i18n for example. - i18nifty achieve the same level of type-safety without requiring you to have a process running in the background while you are coding. - In my library you have a i18n namespace by React component, in typsafe-i18n the namespace are decoupled from the component which makes it much harder to manage. See this would be a nightmare to manage if we had to create the namespace manually.

Onyxia-web is a create-react-app distributed as a Docker image.