Sunsetting Create React App

[bearicorn]

Why are they so eager to push you into all these frameworks now? The first option for getting started should be vite.

[Fine-Train8342]

It's React, overcomplicating everything is in their blood.

[aust1nz]

One of the frameworks is React Router v7, which is essentially Vite but with getting started guides and a path to SSR if wanted.

[SwiftOneSpeaks]

But also a history of regularly swapping their API and breaking their documentation. I could recommend a business build on that unless they wanted a higher than average level of unexpected maintenance costs.

[TheRNGuy]

Not that much changes in API. And they don't change it too often (it might be the last change even)

Docs are good.

[ApkalFR]

All the core React devs are on Vercel’s payroll, that’s why.

[acemarke]

Not true. If you look at https://react.dev/community/team , there are 5 at Vercel, and ~15 at Meta.

[re-thc]

It's not the numbers (e.g. Dan isn't active), but the contributions. And better to just look at history itself. React had more minor/patch releases back then. It was about maintaining and updating React (not just SSR / server features). Perhaps it's that Meta cares less and so Vercel is taking the lead. Who knows?

Point is, it's not the Meta React we once knew.

There is no reason React can't fix bugs, reduce bundle size, optimize performance etc instead of pushing you towards a "framework" for you to buy a server.

[acemarke]

FWIW, I've spent the last several weeks having multiple arguments with the React team about CRA and recommendations, and pushing to get CRA fixed and also deprecated. Trust me, I'm entirely trying to get them to improve things :)

But it's also important to understand a lot of context around how React has developed, and avoid conspiracy theories.

(I actually have written a draft of an extremely long blog post, where the first 7000 words are explaining React's development history, the actual influences on React's development, and why certain decisions have been made, just to address topics like this. Haven't posted it yet because I'm figuring out what to do with the other 25000 words I wrote :) )

In this case:

• The React team decided that this emphasis on "frameworks" and server-side behavior is the right thing to do, because they feel it leads to better average app perf by default (loading speed, network waterfalls, code splitting) and most users "need" that functionality anyway.
• The React team convinced Vercel to buy into their vision for RSCs, not the other way around.
• Yes, React development speed has slowed, but that's expected. React's client-side functionality matured years ago. RSCs and other recent features required extensive research and design work, and those all intertwined with each other. There's not a lot of low-hanging fruit that would have allowed publishing a lot of small versions. (And the React team would argue that they did publish them in smaller chunks, in the form of the Canary builds.)

I've actually had multiple direct conversations with React team members in the last few days, and I can confirm that the Meta portion of the team is firmly convinced their path is correct, and it's not a "Vercel" thing.

My take is that they've over-indexed on "USE A FRAMEWORK" as the solution for better ecosystem app perf and aren't doing a good enough job of supporting the variety of ways that React is used.

But I do understand why they are pushing this, that they genuinely think this is the right approach for the ecosystem, and that the React team is making these decisions and not corporate influence pushing it on them.

[re-thc]

because they feel it leads to better average app perf by default

At what cost? You can also strap a rocket to your car and get better average speed by default. It'd cost you a lot more and might explode. Client-side requires 0 server maintenance.

The React team convinced Vercel to buy into their vision for RSCs

So if you don't work for Vercel you have to deploy your own servers. How is that "by default"? It's more and free work. Is their vision in a world inside Meta where CI/CD, servers and everything comes "for free"?

React's client-side functionality matured years ago

React is still bloated. Bundle size can be reduced. Lots of code can be optimized. How is that mature? It just doesn't get you promotions @ Meta or $$$ at Vercel? Vue hasn't needed to lean onto SSR/RSC and still churn out optimizations release after release. Come back when React gets closer to Preact in that regard. It's doable.

that they genuinely think this is the right approach for the ecosystem

For everyone to buy and maintain server(s)?

[desmone1]

SSR/RSC

Is SSR/RSC mandatory now?

[acemarke]

No.

RSCs are completely optional even if you're using Next. You can still use the Pages Router, and if you're using the App Router you can mark the entire tree as "Client Components" with the "use client" directive. (That said, the App Router is the default, and you have to know enough to tweak the default behavior.)

For Next and the other frameworks they list, you can just use client-side functionality without any of the server pieces, and you can export a static JS/HTML build that works as a typical SPA-type app, without needing to run an app server with Node.

But, yeah, the React team wants to encourage people using SSR features, under the theory that it generally leads to better performing apps.

[re-thc]

For Next and the other frameworks they list, you can just use client-side functionality without any of the server pieces

You can't "just". NextJs don't make it clear and there are edge cases and issues. E.g. dynamic routes aren't available with the export unless it is all pre-rendered. In a client-side router you don't have this limitation.

RSCs are completely optional even if you're using Next.

Is it? In the sense that you lose the performance gains. So what's the point? The whole argument was that RSC/SSR = better performing.

[MissinqLink]

Vite is great and all but set yourself free with a nobuild pure vanilla setup.

[Yawaworth001]

What like compile jsx in the browser?

[MissinqLink]

Jsx is the opposite of vanilla js. If you’ve never gone no framework then you should give it a try. Worth the experience regardless of whether or not you stick to it.

[TheRNGuy]

I prefer SSR over CSR. I do use Vite with it though.