[namuol]

The problem has less to do with the frameworks chosen by the main website's developers, but rather the countless third party services which are mandated by marketing/business realities.

Think Facebook pixel, google analytics (et al), Optimizely, Mixpanel, various "widgets", etc...

In other words: you probably don't really have this problem unless you're working with a large team and for profit.

Easiest way to win these battles is to show real-life "Before"/"After" examples of your site with and without bloaty services to whomever is advocating for their importance.

[tedmiston]

^ This comment covered everything exactly.

If you are concerned of the size of your personal or smaller site, run it against a popular performance testing tool.

The three that I use regularly are: (1) Yellow Lab Tools, (2) Google PageSpeed, and (3) WebPagetest.

Here's how my small personal site (https://www.tedmiston.com) performs on each. I use jQuery 2 and not Bootstrap but Pure, though I am currently migrating to Bootstrap 4.

https://developers.google.com/speed/pagespeed/insights/?url=...

http://yellowlab.tools/result/edfg8pjjkt

http://www.webpagetest.org/result/160403_JS_GX7/

[sfilipov]

Does that mean that for small personal projects, it is acceptable to include jQuery 2 and Bootstrap everywhere, even if custom JS and CSS are a total of 100 lines of code?

AJAX using jQuery is so convenient. I would rather not write these in vanilla JS.

[smt88]

This might help with some of the bloat: https://segment.com/

[namuol]

Unfortunately, most of segment's supported integrations still require the JS lib to be loaded on the client. This is less a limitation of Segment and more a limitation of the aforementioned integrations.