[homebrewer]

Props to them for keeping backwards compatibility. I always dread seeing these major releases, especially after being burned several times by the tire fire of react-router. Migrating a rather large project from 5.6 to 6.0 (10 chart types, around 1k charts in total) took maybe 15 minutes of work. IIRC the only breaking change was them moving the legend to the bottom, which was easy to revert by importing the old theme.

And all that for free. The project was using a commercial library until about a year ago; no regrets since moving to echarts.

[mitemte]

react-router is such a disaster. It’s got to be one of the most irritating but ubiquitous packages. I’m going to migrate to Tanstack Router on a project that uses react-router v6 currently, rather than bother with the v7 migration.

[drewbitt]

There is no real v7 migration though. There hasn't been anything breaking in react router for several years now.

[andrewmcwatters]

It hurts my marketability that I no longer put up with the masochism of the React ecosystem, but moving to web components was such a relief. I don't tolerate these projects that are constantly changing for no good reason.

[mardifoufs]

I'm not sure I follow. Are you saying that you don't use dependencies when using web components? Because that's usually the issue, not react itself. React doesn't really ever break backward compatibility. But yeah, if you don't use any deps, 3rd party upgrades/migrations aren't an issue.

[andrewmcwatters]

React itself is problematic enough considering its design is incoherent (now server-side rendered functional stateless programming with side effects,) but the other question is "What React?"

React isn't 12 years old, React is 5 different libraries, with paradigms that have lived for about roughly 2 years on average.

I don't know about you, but my projects are more mature than 2 years old. I don't have the patience for that kind of bullshit.

And I've done this stuff long enough to know if the kids decide this is the new fashion, the old stuff might incidentally still work, but all of the library's attention is going to be on what the maintainers are working on.

So React is now a server-side rendered, functional, stateless component library with side effects.

And that sounds like the dumbest thing I've ever read in web development.

[mardifoufs]

But you can still use class components. They will never be deprecated afaik. Yes they aren't the most recommended route anymore, but that's fine as long as it doesn't break.

Fwiw, I agree that the SSR route that react is taking is puzzling and makes little sense for most react users. But that's the nice part about react, you don't really have to worry about it. For most other frameworks, you absolutely need to be cautious of where the project lead might want to take the project next, as it almost always means future major breaking changes (vuejs 3.0, svelte 5, etc)

[andrewmcwatters]

"But you can still-" Yeah, I'm not interested in that mentality. No professional should put up with it.

[prinny_]

React itself is ok on that regard . But popular packages that are often installed in React projects very often publish breaking changes or deprecate stuff that used to be “the norm” until just a major version ago. It’s sad because the most common solution is to pin the dependencies.

[mardifoufs]

Yes I agree but wouldn't that be the same if you used WC? The only difference is that web components has a much smaller ecosystem, but there's nothing that makes webcomponents any less prone to dependency hell, or to major churn, except that react has a much wider ecosystem.