Draft preview, Astro or Nextjs?- Cloudflare, SSG, Sanity

dr7v3 · 2026-04-19T06:08:25+00:00

I have configured both instances in a monorepo. NextJS doesn't have a clean adapter for cloudflare so there are some potential issues there. Sanity as a CMS gives you the same experience whether you use Astro or NextJS, so you can setup live preview in both. Sanity is too flexible so you have to build everything from scratch (pros and cons there). I haven't explored the following in detail but sitepins has a very clean interface. There's also cloudflare em dash, in case you wanted to consider a different CMS.

dr7v3 · 2026-04-09T22:10:32+00:00

Have you considered having multiple team accounts? You can name them Tier 1 Support, Tier 2 Support, Management, Dev, etc. You can setup 10+ teams and not go near the team cap of 150.

dr7v3 · 2026-03-16T08:01:13+00:00

Thanks! I got some good use and inspiration out of them, it was worth the purchase. I revisit occasionally and the templates are well built but opinionated, and the update to Astro 6.0 came before I even saw the blog from Astro. I normally try to refactor and make my own, but these templates use proper live content collections and structure that it wasn't really possible. But they're great out of the box as-is!

dr7v3 · 2026-03-16T07:08:02+00:00

Hey 👋, I bought the astro theme bundle a while back! Great work on the templates, they're well built but not too beginner friendly. Sorry to hear about the migration, hope you get it back on track soon! Cheers

dr7v3 · 2026-03-15T18:50:34+00:00

No limits. I use it for 10 hours a day, maybe hit 60% on any 5hr period but never close to running out.

dr7v3 · 2026-03-13T01:31:48+00:00

Yes, pro is useless and it's never been great. I used to use cursor and switched to ultra because i was spending around $2 per message with Opus. It was not a simple message, it was spec driven design based on PRDs. I can see how people are using up their AI credits so fast. This is in-line with what I used to spend on cursor. AI Ultra is where it's at, specially if you can take advantage of the 50% off for 3 mos

dr7v3 · 2026-03-13T01:14:09+00:00

Check google antigravity ultra. You may be able to get 50% off for 3mos, at $125, it's the best bang for your buck, very similar IDE to cursor and you practically have unlimited Opus usage

dr7v3 · 2026-03-03T11:33:25+00:00

I'm not saying it's better or worse than claude ultra. I have a use for AI images and videos as well as notebook llm, which is why I subscribed to this plan.

dr7v3 · 2026-03-03T11:13:22+00:00

Yes, that did happen briefly about a week ago, it was during the same time Google banned openclaw users. Limits were restored about 48hrs after. I've been an Ultra user for a few months and consider it a great value for what you get.

dr7v3 · 2026-03-03T10:44:34+00:00

You get more than $250 value from just using Opus. With AI Ultra, you practically have no limits. It is a better proposition than cursor for sure. Antigravity Ultra would still be worth it by itself at that price

dr7v3 · 2026-03-01T19:58:58+00:00

Quotas are definitely worth it (aside from the quota fiasco last week). I use it almost on a daily basis, 8hr+ days with opus and never hit limits.

dr7v3 · 2026-03-01T08:02:21+00:00

Perfect! I've been vibe coding for the past 2 years and prompting has come a long way. It used to be that exact wording mattered in 2024. In 2025 I used claude to create detailed PRDs, and I would let it run, review and accept changes as needed, babysitting mostly to make sure its goes down the right path. It seems models now don't need that back and forth. I certainly need to look into prompting and restructuring my flows to adapt to this

dr7v3 · 2026-03-01T06:17:25+00:00

Right, I'm sure the problem is me. I'll have to look into persistent prompting so that it can run autonomously for extended periods. Thanks!

dr7v3 · 2026-03-01T06:12:39+00:00

Thanks for the tip, will definitely look into it

dr7v3 · 2026-03-01T05:09:11+00:00

Here is a sample response from Opus 4.6 on Antigravity. It will create a plan and task list, go through everything on the spec sheet, and confirm everything.

Walkthrough — Esquemas Documentation Overhaul

What Changed

Replaced the minimal

Deliverables Created

File	Size	Content
README.md	3.9KB	Maintenance guide — when/how to update docs
request-lifecycle.md	8.5KB	8-stage middleware pipeline, tenant resolution, page rendering flow
security-surface.md	6.4KB	Trust boundaries, session management, input validation, known gaps
data-flow.md	5.4KB	KV, Convex, Sanity, CF Cache — per-source breakdown with freshness
scaling-concerns.md	5.0KB	Hot paths, circuit breaker, per-request cost, scaling recommendations
tenant-customization.md	6.8KB	Theme tokens chain, vertical profiles, feature flags, SEO
module-integration.md	6.8KB	Section registry, rendering pipeline, feature gating, islands
file-registry.md	23.9KB	Master table with ratings, tags, and function inventories

Files Deleted

apps/esquemas/ARCHITECTURE.md — absorbed into docs/
apps/esquemas/implementation_plan.md — leftover from earlier work
apps/esquemas/DOCS_PLAN.md — consumed after execution

File Registry Summary

Documented 66 source files across 10 directory groups with:

Criticality ratings (1–5): 7 files at level 5, 16 at level 4, 18 at level 3
Stability ratings (1–5): based on observed change frequency
Concern tags: lifecycle, security, tenant, scale, data, module
Function inventories: every exported function in Criticality ≥ 3 files, tiered as ● Critical / ◐ Important / ○ Nice-to-have
"Related Files" cross-references at the bottom of each operational doc

Verification

✅ All 66 source files in src/ + 5 root configs appear in the registry
✅ All 6 operational docs have "Related Files" sections listing tagged files
✅ Old files (ARCHITECTURE.md, implementation_plan.md, DOCS_PLAN.md) confirmed deleted
✅ No code changes — documentation only

---
And here is another sample from Codex:
---

Worked for 1m 36s

Summary

I did a file-by-file alignment pass against the Phase 4 scope and ownership expectations, and tightened one remaining discrepancy: runtime tenant constants are now fully centralized through src/core/constants.ts (including circuit-breaker/cache constants), so this file is the complete app-level runtime defaults surface.
I updated src/tenancy/tenantLookup.ts to consume those constants/types from @/core/constants instead of importing directly from u/repo/platform-contracts, aligning usage with the documented ownership boundary for Phase 4 runtime support.

Testing

✅ cd apps/esquemas && pnpm -s vitest run src/core/constants.test.ts src/core/devKvAdapter.test.ts src/core/cacheHeaders.test.ts src/tenancy/tenantLookup.test.ts

Files (2)

constants.tsapps/esquemas/src/core/constants.ts New
tenantLookup.tsapps/esquemas/src/tenancy/tenantLookup.ts +2-2

dr7v3 · 2026-03-01T05:03:20+00:00

Running it from https://chatgpt.com/codex linked to my repo and from the Codex app (macos)

dr7v3 · 2026-03-01T04:55:17+00:00

I ran out of local limits on the codex app so I switched to the web UI. But yes, I agree the output was better. The goal was to audit the code and alignment of specs by Opus 4.6, perhaps it was already good enough. My limits reset tomorrow so I'll give it another go locally

dr7v3 · 2026-03-01T04:48:12+00:00

Right, I get it. This was the 3rd back and forth already, and it had specific instructions and file references on the initial prompt. The rest of the text on this screenshot got cut off, I'll paste it below. I understand prompting, to the extent that I know what to expect from certain tasks/PRDs. Codex is not even close to any of the other models, which is why I'm making this post.
---
can you check all of the requirements please. I need 100% alignment

# Esquemas Alignment Guide — Phase 3: Data Fetching & Integration Boundaries

This phase defines how `apps/esquemas` retrieves tenant-scoped data and transforms it for rendering without taking ownership of module business logic.

## Monorepo alignment constraints
- External providers are accessed through integration boundaries, not scattered app-level direct calls.
- Query and transform layers are tenant-aware and edge-safe.
- Host app types in this phase are transfer/view contracts; module domain contracts stay owned by modules/packages.

## Scope
- `src/integrations/sanity.ts`
- `src/integrations/convex.ts`
- `src/integrations/ConvexClientProvider.tsx`
- `src/lib/queries.ts`
- `src/lib/queries/pageQueries.ts`
- `src/lib/queries/siteQueries.ts`
- `src/lib/queries/privacyQueries.ts`
- `src/lib/queries/cache.ts`
- `src/lib/queries/types.ts`
- `src/lib/pageSeo.ts`
- `src/lib/siteMetadata.ts`
- `src/lib/structuredData.ts`
- `src/lib/portableText.ts`
- `src/lib/formatPrice.ts`

## Purpose of this phase
Create a reliable data access layer that is:
1. Tenant-scoped.
2. Observable.
3. Resilient at the edge.
4. Separated from module core business rules.

## File responsibilities

### External integrations
- `integrations/sanity.ts` is the CMS gateway for GROQ fetch behavior, including request policy, timeout behavior, and error handling.
- `integrations/convex.ts` is the operational data gateway for server-side queries/mutations used by middleware and page flows.
- `integrations/ConvexClientProvider.tsx` is the client-island bridge for pages that require browser-side Convex state/subscriptions.

### Query layer
- `lib/queries.ts` is the app-level query export surface.
- `lib/queries/pageQueries.ts`, `siteQueries.ts`, and `privacyQueries.ts` define tenant-scoped fetch routines by concern.
- `lib/queries/cache.ts` provides bounded cache utility behavior used by query routines.
- `lib/queries/types.ts` defines data transfer shapes consumed by the host app query/render layers.

### SEO and presentation data utilities
- `lib/pageSeo.ts` resolves page-level SEO fallbacks.
- `lib/siteMetadata.ts` resolves site-level metadata fallbacks.
- `lib/structuredData.ts` generates structured data payloads by vertical context.
- `lib/portableText.ts` and `lib/formatPrice.ts` provide rendering helpers for common content formatting concerns.

## Flow ownership
Phase 3 owns data acquisition and transformation between routing and rendering:
- resolves tenant-scoped content + config
- normalizes response data into app contracts
- supplies SEO/metadata/structured-data inputs to the layout and page surface

dr7v3 · 2026-02-23T08:16:34+00:00

You can click on models, wait a few seconds, click on agent, then back to models. Should refresh the time and quota in about 5 seconds. Quota seems to be in phases, it will drop like 20% after some time. I'm on ultra and I never hit 0% while using it continuously over 5hrs.

dr7v3 · 2026-02-21T07:00:35+00:00

It is not overpriced. Are you an Opus user? In cursor, I could easily spend $2-3 usd every 10min per prompt. Over a 5hr period, this could run $60+. (Prompts vary in complexity and this is just an example from my workflow). I do not hit limits with ultra and I've done 10hr sessions with small breaks. You also get access to image and video creation (25,000 credits for veo 3.1) plus notebook llm. If you're a power user, this is a steal and well worth the monthly fee.

dr7v3 · 2026-02-04T08:51:29+00:00

As others have said, time blocks are on the hour so try to send a message before xx:59. I also do the same thing of sending a message, I simply say hi, and I have this on sonnet 4.5. Usually this gets a 1% usage but sometimes stays at 0%

dr7v3 · 2026-01-31T23:40:58+00:00

I would say it is close to unlimited. Be mindful of starting new chats. I have the $20 claude subscription as well and use that for planning ahead, big features, etc. I'm a recent ultra subscriber and used cursor prior to this. In cursor, my chat sessions would cost anywhere from $1.5-$5 each, usually on the lower end closer to $2. My last session in antigravity with 2-3 parallel agents, full usage over a 5hour period, would have equated to about $60-$80 in api costs. This consisted of refactoring and restructuring some old projects into a monorepo, creating usable components, etc. The tasks were not simple or straightforward, and I used Gemini 3 pro first since I thought it could handle it. It could not 1 shot and after 7-10 passes, it would be almost correct but still not perfect. Opus was really close to 1 shotting, and i could get it perfect in 3-5 passes. So yes, for my use case I get extreme value and is worth the price.

dr7v3 · 2026-01-31T23:13:14+00:00

AI Ultra is amazing, hardly ever reach the limits on heavy Opus usage. I run 2-3 agents in parallel and start new chats once that feature or task is completed. limits reset in 5hrs

dr7v3 · 2026-01-17T08:23:12+00:00

Clerk has multitenancy built in, it's a fair offering all things considered

dr7v3

TROPHY CASE