| ▲ | victorbjorklund 13 hours ago |
| Oh no. This isn’t good. I’m glad that the team gets a payout but as an Astro user I don’t love it being owned by CF and that the goals of the project (at least indirectly) goes from the best way to deploy it to the best way to deploy it using CF. |
|
| ▲ | sp4cec0wb0y 13 hours ago | parent [-] |
| I don't anticipate it changing like that. You still do a build using Vite and deploy the static assets. How could they change that to make it difficult to host elsewhere? |
| |
| ▲ | victorbjorklund 11 hours ago | parent [-] | | Let’s hope you’re right. I think vendor lock in is possible if they focus on features tightly coupled to Cloudflare. Look at Next.js. In theory you can deploy it anywhere, but in practice it is harder outside Vercel because of tight coupling around things like caching. You do not have to use those features, but if the framework is built to expect them, it pushes people into that platform. I can imagine Astro becoming very attractive to use with Cloudflare Workers and slowly locking people into that model. | | |
| ▲ | dvtkrlbs 9 hours ago | parent [-] | | It is not similar imho. First NextJS build system is not really exposed apart from a simple docker example and all advanced features of NextJS is kinda coupled to Vercel. For Astro it is just a Vite project with integration designed from day mind they would have to rip everything apart and that would probably cause a prominent fork. The other part is Cloudflare is not dependent Astro being vendor locked as much as Vercel being dependent on NextJS being vendor locked. |
|
|