-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 144
RFC: Deprecate @faustwp/experimental-app-router
#2019
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Comments
Permission to fork and remake without apollo? @moonmeister |
@CesarBenavides777 The team is in the early phases of reworking most of Faust. This action is a step towards reducing the maintenance of "experimental" features so we can focus on the new things we'll be building. I can promise you App router support will be part of this new future. We also intend to be neutral to the GraphQL client. Meaning, Apollo will not be required or default. Our other goal moving forward is to make our work much more public and actively engage with the community in building and inviting them into the process. So, you're welcome to fork this, especially if you want to tweak/update it for something you're currently building. But you're also welcome to join with us in building something new. |
Idea
The deprecation of the
@faustwp/experimental-app-router
package.Reasoning
While Next's
App Router
is rightfully growing in popularity, Faust's reliance on Apollo means this package is never likely to lose its beta tag. For context, Apollo has stated that to fully support the Next.js App Router, upstream APIs would need to be added. APIs that are unlikely to be added.This, combined with active work towards a more modular "Faust" that doesn't necessarily rely on Apollo, means this particular package should be deprecated in favor of any future solution but not be presented to new users as a "coming soon" solution.
Steps
canary
branch - chore: remove app router from canary branch #2032https://faustjs.org/a-retrospective-on-4-years-of-faust-js
Please let us know if you have any concerns about this proposal.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: