41–50 of 147 posts
Why Gatsby, specifically? This seems like an odd choice.
I think it's an acquihire. They don't necessarily want Gatsby. They want the team who built Gatsby.
Gatsby was an open-source project. What they acquired exactly? Have they purchased a usb stick installed gatsby in it?
Gatsby was an open-source project. What they acquired exactly? Have they purchased a usb stick installed gatsby in it?
you realize that organizations that develop open source software can sell support contracts, consulting, services, hosting, etc, all things that generate revenue. I guess you could have said the same about RedHat, yet IBM acquired them for $34 billion. I wonder why they would pay that much for an open source company? Hmmmm... there must be a reason?
Other companies use those technologies and have to pay for commercial licenses? They can freeze out competitors? I don't know, just spitballing.
This kind of stuff is annoying. Netlify had no need to acquire this. They just want to increase their revenue. As a Hugo user on Netlify, I hope this doesn't affect me negatively.
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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Gatsby Inc is a SaaS that provides hosting.
aren't they just an AWS wrapper?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They have an in-house framework person with Ryan Carniato (Solid JS) and in-house SSG expertise with Zach Leatherman (11ty). I think this rounds out more in the CMS / React realm, which gives them a direct line to compete with Next.js
They're also involved somewhat in RedwoodJS. Tom Preston-Werner who started Redwood is on their board and an investor in them. Like Gatsby, RedwoodJS uses GraphQL. https://tom.preston-werner.com/2020/03/04/joining-the-netlif... https://redwoodjs.com/
However, its not grasped nearly the same mindshare as Remix, let alone Next.js, and its arguably superior to Remix at least
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh, what's wrong with it? It looked nice and was considering using it for a marketing site.
It's pretty tightly coupled to webpack and has a reputation for being extremely slow to rebuild a site. Fine for small sites but I've heard of painful multiple minute long rebuild cycles for large sites with a lot of content.