[gered]

> Luminus looked good but seems to be shunned by the community.

Can I ask what left you with that impression? I've no idea if this is true or not as I don't participate much in the Clojure community, I'm just genuinely curious. I guess a bunch of people just use the lighter weight Compojure/Ring templates that really leave you with an extremely barebones web app to start with?

I used Luminus myself when starting out, but I feel that as you grow more comfortable with Clojure web dev, you'd _typically_ end up putting together your own Leiningen template more tailored to how you like to set things up (as I ended up doing). But even still, I don't think Luminus is by any means bad?

[nickik]

Shunned is a strong word and I don't think it applies. I think Luminis is ok for some things but by and enlarge most people doing webdev in Clojure prefere to go a different way.

Saying it is shunned makes it sound like a whitch-hunt but that not the case. I don't even think the community has an opinion on it. Most just dont use it.

[yogthos]

The main goal for Luminus is to address the problems that newcomers would have. It's a batteries included template that sets up some reasonable defaults for your typical web app. That's coupled with a documentation site that explains how to accomplish different tasks using the platform.

Majority of the community are experienced Clojure developers, and have already found their own preferred setup. So, it's not terribly surprising that it's not the target demographic. Once you know the web stack, the libraries that work well, and how to put them together, then it's easy to make an app that's custom tailored to your needs. This is the primary reason for the libraries > frameworks mantra.

However, as the comments in this thread indicate, there's clearly a need for Luminus. Anybody who's new to the language and the ecosystem, needs a decent starting point. Luminus is that.