ReactJS: BSD + Patents licensing model

The devil is in details, so people say. Few months ago, while working on prototype of cakephp-calendar, we had an interesting debate over front-end stack for Calendar component. At the same time, in parallel, WordPress community was buzzing about their text editor – Gutenberg whether to use ReactJS vs VueJS libraries. One of the reasons of choosing VueJS, was licensing agreement.

The license granted hereunder will terminate, automatically and without notice,
if you (or any of your subsidiaries, corporate affiliates or agents) initiate directly or indirectly, or take a direct financial interest in, any Patent Assertion…(c)

Investing man-hours into VueJS research and prototyping was right, especially after Raul Kripalani published an interesting article on the license review of ReactJS.

Updated: One more review of FB React JS licensing from WordPress Tavern.

JavaScript: shooting yourself in the foot with configs once again

fef19aa014b44daee11603ce64525634a7fc79cc3cb7b81b3a413f3f178edbdc
Don’t be mainstream!

I’m not the only one blown away after digging up some of React/Redux boilerplate code. Great article proving some of my thoughts on the subject:

Copy-pasting configs from boilerplate projects always leads to hard-to-debug issues like this. It’s easy to miss somebody’s configuration decisions when you’re not the one making them. Don’t use boilerplate projects unless you understand each and every technology it uses!

I understand Dan’s frustration. But could we look at this from a different perspective? Don Norman’s The Design of Everyday Things teaches that there’s no such thing as “user error” — humans always make mistakes, and the failure to deal with these is on the product, not the user. How would we approach these user errors if we looked at them as design failures?

Yet another justification of “convention over configuration” and the reason of choosing EmberJS at the given time. Sorry React, not now, maybe a bit later.