stripity_stripe VS redwood

I think this needs a big qualifier. I feel the same way, when it's a project I'm capable of doing the work for. For example, I recently needed a way to deal with Stripe early fraud warnings and the library I used didn't have those yet, so I added them (this was all on my own time I should add)[1].

However, there are tons of dependencies that we use for all sorts of things that are highly complex where very few people would be able to send a PR (openssl for example). Things in highly complex codebases, or deeply unfamiliar languages, etc. I maintain a forked linux driver for a wireless card for example, and I don't expect there's more than a handful of people that could hack on it without introducing tears and devastation.

For the projects I maintain, I would just say, "if you can, please consider a PR. If you're not sure it would be accepted I'm happy to be asked! If you can't send a PR, give as much info as you can and be polite. With that we're good.

[1]: https://github.com/beam-community/stripity_stripe/pull/728

I recently had to create a subscription payment solution for Tolc, a C++ to other languages bindings compiler. During the process I wish I had a simple to follow, unassuming tutorial that I could follow. Since I couldn't find one, I wrote one myself! Even though I could use the excellent stripity_stripe, I still had to overcome some pitfalls.

I'm going to attempt to answer by way of links to active projects for you:

Stripe, including webhooks support, actively developed: https://github.com/code-corps/stripity_stripe

Global pay solution that supports everything: they are all a bit crap you're right, the best I've found is https://github.com/aviabird/gringotts and ex_money really is amazing that integrates with it (I would suggest it's better than the equivalent ruby gem). To be fair I'm not sure I'd want to use the pay gem with anything complex as you need to be able to use the specific quirks of each API properly.

You're also right about noticed, after looking into it more it would be worth building for elixir for sure. Ravenx represents a start but it's unmaintained and doesn't have a huge number of strategies. It depends on how much I needed to do notifications like this. For the apps that I've built we've just needed database and grouped emails sent once per day, no need for texts or slack etc. There's no reason these couldn't be added fairly simply but I agree noticed is very neat.

Frameworks are a theme with this month's Release Radar, so here's another. Redwood is a full-stack, JavaScript/TypeScript web application, designed to scale with you. It uses React frontend for the frontend and links to a custom GraphQL API for the backend. The latest version includes a bunch of breaking changes such as moving to Node 20.0, the Redwood Studio, and highly requested GraphQL features such as Realtime, Fragments, and Trusted Documents, the server file, new router hooks, and heaps more. If you've previously used Redwood, you'll probably want to upgrade to version 7.0. The team have put together a handy migration guide for you to follow.

The other piece of important information to acknowledge here is that when we say RSCs need a framework, “framework” effectively just means “Next.js.” There are some smaller frameworks (like Waku) that support RSCs. There are also some larger and more established frameworks (like Redwood) that have plans to support RSCs or (like Gatsby) only support RSCs in beta. We will likely see this change once we get React 19 and RSCs are part of the Stable version. However, for now, Next.js is currently the only framework recommended in the official React docs that supports server components.

Although there are quite a few opinionated battery-included frameworks that have picked up everything for you like RedwoodJS, Blitz, and Create-T3-App, you still need to choose between them and hope that they will remain mainstream and well-maintained in the future. So how should we choose?

Web development frameworks in JavaScript, such as NextJS and RedwoodJS, have gained popularity among developers. Choosing the right framework, library, or tool for a project is crucial for efficient development. Developers often seek the best tools to save time and avoid reinventing the wheel.

The community here is pretty friendly. https://redwoodjs.com/

Next.js 13 ignited the first wave of attention to React Server Components (RSC) around the end of last year. Over time, other frameworks, like Remix and RedwoodJS, have also started to put RSC into their future road maps. However, the entire "moving computation to the server-side" direction of React/Next.js has been highly controversial from the very beginning.

I'm currently experimenting with the fantastic Redwood framework. However, while going through the excellent tutorial, I didn't find any guidance on using data validation libraries like Yup, Zod, Vest, etc. So, I had to do some investigation and came up with a solution. This article describes the implementation of validation with Zod in a fresh Redwood app. You can find the sources at this github repository.

RBAC is one of the most common authorization models - users are assigned different roles, and resource access privileges are controlled at the role level. Despite its limitations, RBAC is a popular choice for simple applications, and some frameworks (like RedwoodJS) have built-in support for it.

Check it out here: https://redwoodjs.com/