[benswerd]

I think this is a misinterpretation. BaseUI provides baseline semantics that because the code is in your codebase you can choose to keep or remove. BaseUI is also actively unstyled/unopinionated, you use it to compose your own components, which again live in your codebase.

When you import shadcn components you can rebuild them however you want, thats the point.

[bbg2401]

> When you import shadcn components you can rebuild them however you want, thats the point.

Why not use BaseUI directly?

[benswerd]

I'm a big believer in guides. ShadCN provides great starting points for continued engineering as do other ShadCN libraries. For companies with the resources to, they do just start with BaseUI.

In the long run I think most UI will be BaseUI/RadixUI + Component and style guides, prompts, and traditional packages will no longer be relevant.

[nightski]

I mean, you are using BaseUI directly... The components on top live in your code base.

[benswerd]

i agree, very pro that

[scoot]

That seems a bit of non-argument. You can choose to keep or remove any components from your codebase, styled or unstyled, composable or monolithic.

What Shadcn gives you is a layer of abstraction that separates the underlying (imported) components from the code that consumes them, so you change your button in one place. It’s exactly how better frontend teams consume just about any component library, Base UI or otherwise.

Shadcn really is a bit of a nothing burger, or rather it’s a bit of soggy lettuce between the meat and the bun.