Regarding choice of framework for HTML-backed UIs. My initial suggestion is to try not to go into a fully-opinionated stack like React.
My opinion has nothing to do with React itself, it's quality or suitability, but with a generic approach of using an opinionated stack that diverges from vanilla javascript. Sticking as close to bare metal as possible, will allow us to solve our needs by improving the Web stack, instead of improving a particular framework. Over time, if we're successful, we will not only create Firefox UI in HTML stack, but we'll enable others to create UI on the level of complexity of Firefox one's using the same stack. If we go for an opinionated framework, we'll sort of lock ourselves in their technology, irrelevant how good it is. If 5 years from now, React will not be the best solution, we'll have a major challenge to migrate away from it, but as :brendan likes to say "Always bet on JS" - JS will be here and using JS will likely be the right choice for our high level glue code. I'd also prefer to develop dependency-free libraries that we can contribute to the web world, than react plugins that we would contribute to react community only. For that reason, I'd suggest we try to evaluate what needs to we really have that we believe react could solve - is it about data bindings? routing? components? and consider trying to find a minimal library that will solve those. For example, vue seems to be much lighter and less opinionated, while polymer seems to be sticking closer to the vanilla web stack increasing the chance that we'll be able to eventually reduce our reliance on any framework as the web stack progresses. zb. _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
