|
|
|
|
|
by reactordev
855 days ago
|
|
Not to dissuade or discourage but having a cli tool on top a cli tool on top a cli tool is kind of ridiculous and says a lot more about web dev these days. Wouldn’t someone using Shadcn just use their cli and install all the things? Wouldn’t a company using Shadcn have their own git or npm of which they can install custom private packages? I’m at a loss at what exactly the value prop of this is. |
|
I believe the answer comes from this line:
> Custom Registry Support
This is effectively the shadcn CLI, but with the ability to add custom sources of content in the form of registries. Imagine you want to add a shadcn component, a fontawesome icon, or another custom library component. Wouldn't it be nice to have it all accessible via one unified interface.
Anything that promotes more code-owning and fewer dependencies for lower level items (components, icons, etc.) is a win in my book.
Similar prior art is sly-cli: https://sly-cli.fly.dev
@OP: I'd consider renaming your project to avoid co-opting the shadcn name, though. For your benefit and for shadcn's.