[joshmanders]

Vercel has Next.js, Shopify just acquired Remix, now Netlify Gatsby.

This is bad news for full stack JavaScript applications and ecosystem. This is gonna cause vendor lock-in, it's already showing in some of them. Open source is losing and something needs to change.

I am seeing a future where you have to rewrite your whole app in a different framework just to change hosts.

[phawksworth]

[Disclaimer: I work in the Netlify DX team]

I recognize that fear. And have made similar observations of the current landscape.

Our hope in this instance is actually that the opposite is true.

The goal of this acquisition is not to OWN a JavaScript framework. Gatsby Inc is far bigger than Gatsby.js

The Gatsby.js project will join the Solid.js and Eleventy open source projects that Netlify already support through full time employment but who's roadmaps and operations are their own. Using those tools is not a means for Netlify to funnel developers into our platform, nor a means to attempt to lock users in. Our philosophy is that an abundance and variety of such tools is good for the web (and as a result good for us). Also that more tools will come in future and that we'd like to try to provide the best experience and support for whatever those might be down the line. We can't own it all. We'd prefer to support it.

Meanwhile, Gatsby Inc have created very powerful build and content orchestration tooling which is currently only available to Gatsby.js users. This acquisition will result in those capabilities being made available to any frameworks further helping all comers to the frameworks landscape.

[kilburn]

> Meanwhile, Gatsby Inc have created very powerful build and content orchestration tooling which is currently only available to Gatsby.js users. This acquisition will result in those capabilities being made available to any frameworks further helping all comers to the frameworks landscape.

This sounds ridiculous to me. The "powerful build and content orchestration tooling" of Gatsby Inc. is basically the same stuff that everyone else is doing in this space. This includes:

- The traditional Gatsby competitors (Vercel, GH Pages).

- Heroku, Fly.io and similar.

- Cloud-specific options such as AWS Amplify.

[phawksworth]

I don't quite agree. Gatsby Inc have been doing a ton of work in this area, and it is really impressive. It's one of the reasons that its platform has been such a draw to larger companies with more complex data and content sourcing needs.

Theo had a pretty perceptive take on this on his stream yesterday. Worth a look. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bJc9UYva46I&t=5384s

Meanwhile, with so many people talking about the acquisition as if Netlify purely acquired the Gatsby.js framework, I find it helpful to frame it like this:

Gatsby Inc is to Gatsby.js as Vercel is to Next.js

Netlify acquired Gatsby Inc

[kilburn]

I understand that you're a DX at Netlify and your job is to advocate for whatever tech happens to be on your backyard. You openly acknowledged it and I thank you for it.

However, there is still a line that, when crossed, turns you into a regular old spammer. You are walking _very_ close to that line.

The Valhalla platform was "launched" 2 months ago. Even today there's ZERO public technical documentation on it. You can only find a bunch of marketing slides, SEO-ridden blog posts etc. saying that it's great, plus a video showing a few queries against a regular GraphQL server.

Please stop pretending that this quasi-vaporware platform is the best thing since french fries. Thanks.

[ascorbic]

I work at Netlify on framework integrations.

We plan to do the exact opposite. Right now there are features in Gatsby that were built to support only Gatsby Cloud. I know this all too well as I had to reverse engineer them to implement them on Netlify! We don't want that anymore. I am hoping that Gatsby will be like SvelteKit, Remix, Astro, Nuxt etc and will be platform agnostic again. Whether that's via an adapter pattern (my preference) or something else remains to be seen. This acquisition was not about controlling a framework, just as we don't attempt to control SolidJS or 11ty now.

[9dev]

Counter to this, there’s SvelteKit, for example, which provides „adapters“ for the different platforms, eg. Netlify, Vercel and Cloudflare. I hope that’s the way we’re going to oppose this movement as a whole.

[rsstack]

That's how they all worked before being acquired. SK is Vercel now too and we don't know yet how it'll change over time.

[rich_harris]

Svelte creator and Vercel employee here. Vercel does indeed invest heavily in Svelte and SvelteKit, not least by employing me and Simon Holthausen (and potentially others in future), but there's no danger of lock-in — we're just two members of a much larger core team. Governance-wise, it's an independent project, and we'd be thrilled if other companies also chose to employ core team members! You can see pull requests like https://github.com/sveltejs/kit/pull/8740 as an example of how we approach the relationship between SvelteKit and Vercel — we're adding a new feature and Vercel will be the first adapter that gets to take advantage of it, but we're careful to design the feature in a platform-agnostic way (we even @'d a Netlify engineer to make sure that they're aware of the work in case they also want to take advantage of it).

Anyway, I'm sure this will be said elsewhere in the thread but it bears repeating — the Next team similarly works hard to make sure that your Next apps can be self-hosted and run on other platforms.

[rsstack]

First, I appreciate your response (and overall your life work - we're Svelte.js users, about 60% of our source code is in Svelte, and we have a couple of non-critical-path SvelteKit apps).

While Vercel's intentions are good, and your personal intentions are beyond reproach, this strategy all but ensures eventual vendor lock-in without explicitly saying so. Vercel's compatibility will increase over time and other vendors will have best-effort implementations of certain features, but never the complete feature matrix. The industry (esp. medium/large companies) will quickly pick on the relation of "Vercel is needed for ease of mind when using SvelteKit in production", as I've heard from many companies considering/using Next.js. Do people use Next.js without Vercel? Yes. Do companies evaluating Next.js consider it vendor-locked? If they're experienced, yes.

[whatshisface]

The way adapters work in SvelteKit doesn't change very fast, in fact it's stable enough that community-created adapters for things like Google Cloud can keep up just with volunteer effort. I do not think what you're describing will happen.

[ascorbic]

As the Netlify engineer that Rich @'d, I can back him up on this. SvelteKit is still admirably platform agnostic. In fact I think it supported Netlify Edge Functions before it did Vercel's!

[leerob]

SvelteKit remains independent and no plans to change that.

[throwingrocks]

Remix does the same FWIW

[lolinder]

I disagree that this is a bad thing. If the frameworks start developing lock-in they can and will be forked. In the meantime, we have multiple competing full-stack JavaScript frameworks that are being actively funded.

Also, I think Netlify and company know that a framework that is locked in won't be adopted. The history of mainstream developer tooling over the last thirty years is a migration away from proprietary languages and frameworks, and it's going to take more than a few rogue JS fullstack frameworks to change that.

[subpixel]

I think you’re missing the forest for the trees. Gatsbyjs is as good as dead, but this Valhalla thing has legs, and the Gatsby team (as much of it as they have hired) has deep experience tackling problems around ingesting data from a wide array of sources for efficient web delivery.

Every single fortune 1000 company has the problem Valhalla is trying to solve. Most have painted themselves into a multi-CMS corner and are closer to copy/paste solutions for getting content where it’s needed than the sort of GraphQL approach Gatsby (the company) is advocating.

The marketing-speak here is something like “all your content, no matter where it lives, delivered to your customers, no matter where they are.”

[ohadpr]

The announcement focuses on Gatsby’s Valhalla Content Hub rather than on Gatsby the framework.

https://www.gatsbyjs.com/products/valhalla-content-hub/

Edit: typo

[hoofhearted]

Future prediction: Vercel acquires Netlify.. Especially for the Netlify admin feature where a user can create pages in a WYSIWYG editor and save them in Git. Pretty much would make Wordpress obsolete at that point in my opinion.

Don’t hold me to it, just an educated guess.

[brundolf]

These frameworks spit out a bunch of static files to serve, which you can host just about anywhere. They also all use React, which means if you did want to switch frameworks, the majority of your code should be usable either as-is or with a little elbow grease. The situation you describe is just not something I'm worried about

[berkle4455]

> This is gonna cause vendor lock-in

God forbid there's actual paid engineers and support behind popular JavaScript tooling.

[Alifatisk]

> This is bad news for full stack JavaScript applications and ecosystem. > Open source is losing and something needs to change.

You still have Nuxt ;)

[Alifatisk]

Didn’t Astro support multiple frameworks at once?

[benackles]

Astro's Island Architecture supports selectively including multiple component frameworks / JavaScript libraries (React, Vue, Svelte, etc..) for interactivity.

Gatsby's Vahalla Content Hub supports multiple (not all at once) meta frameworks like Next.js, Gatsby, Nuxt, Remix, SvelteKit, etc...

[sylvinus]

It still does!

[leerob]

If you're wondering how Vercel funds Next.js, and if features work self-hosted, you can read this: https://twitter.com/leeerob/status/1619724800783712256

tl;dr all features work self-hosted

[scubatradezone]

maybe open-source should have more support. I feel like that's usually the reason people at my company avoid some open-source solutions

[throwingrocks]

Pure FUD