To be clear, we have fun at TigerBeetle!

And to be fair, we did present the metrics (footprint etc.), and we did discuss alternatives to Docusaurus (e.g. Zine, which is pretty great!).

I think at the heart of your argument is this assumption that unquestionably taking on dependencies would achieve the same quality in less time, and that a methodology such as TigerStyle that challenges this assumption need necessarily take "infinite time". You almost force us to apologize that we don't share this view! :)

But again, this was the quickest, highest quality path (for us, at least!).

Have you read TigerStyle, our engineering methodology? And have you watched our talk? Perhaps that will help close the gap in understanding how we think about engineering at TigerBeetle: not as an expense to be minimized, to minimize only our own development time, but as an asset, to be invested in, since we build it once, but developers enjoy it many times over. However, as you watch TigerStyle, you'll see it's not only about quality, but also a way to get quality in less time (go slow to go fast).

In other words, I think we differ when it comes to Total Cost of Ownership. We're not trying to minimize only our own development time, but investing in it, to produce something quality for our community, and so minimize the Total Cost of Ownership across the relationship as a whole (ours + community) [1].

[1] Our talk on our business methodology, Biodigital Jazz! goes into this idea of TCO across the community: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C98cyJ-wJuY

Thanks for the reply!

I haven't read TigerStyle yet, but I'll check it out. Is this the canonical URL?

https://github.com/tigerbeetle/tigerbeetle/blob/main/docs/TI...