Frontend in react and nextjs
We have not changed since sprint 2, which can be found at
Back end (Finalised and Completed in Sprint 1-2)
https://unswseng.atlassian.net/l/c/n1RmSeTy
Final choice
NodeJS
We chose to use NodeJS as it’s a very well supported and commonly used runtime. NPM allowed us to easily install further frameworks and libraries which made development much easier.
NextJS
NextJS was chosen as it adds a fairly easy to use the framework to work with that Joshua had some experience with. None of its more advanced rendering features was used however it allowed for a fairly easy to understand format for the frontend development.
React
React was used as a library to enable interactive and reactive parts of the site.
Front end
LayerName | Framework | NotesType | Current team member knowledge of frameworks | Difficulty of frameworks to learn | How well the framework is documented | Availability / pricing of platforms | Additional Notes | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Express | Back-end |
| Nodejs framework | Team has no experience | -Medium level | -Well documented | Free + open source | N/A | |||||
Next.js | Back-end |
| Team has no experience |
| Nodejs framework | Joshua has minimal experience. | -Easy to use simply -Some parts like different rendering types can be more complicated | -Fairly well documented -Can find some debugging more difficult due to differences between frameworks | Free + open source | N/A | |||
Boot strap | CSS Framework |
|
|
|
|
| React | Front-end | Team has no experience | -Easy to use however can be more complicated then simple plain javascript however easier for better looking designs | -Well documented with lots of support | Free + open source | Adds extra visual flair |
React | Library | Joshua has minimal. Rest of team has no experience |
|
| -Fialry easy to learn, has some advance features -Easy to get started with | -Very well documented as very commonly used | Free + open source | Pro: Reuse HTML code anywhere in the app to build other components | Angular | Front-end | Full-Con: not as in depth documentation Cons : limits team size | ||
Angular | Javascript framework | Team has no experience | -Quite difficult to learn in comparison to React -Steep learning curve. | -Well documented however less common then react | Free + open source | Vue | Front-end |
| -Clean code : compiles JS and will point out errors -Server performance : improved in app -Issues : complex to understand , migrating from old version to new Angular 8 version can slow down project | ||||
Vue | Javascript framework | Team has no experience | -Challenging to debug | -Well documented however can be harder to find correct help | Free + open source | ||||||||
Vanilla |
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||||
Ext JS |
|
| Team has no experience |
|
| Different packages : Community : Free (for up to 5 developers) Pro: $1300 per developer. Enterprise: $1900 per developer
| |||||||
NodeJS |
|
| Team has no experience |
|
| Free + open source Flexibility - write both HTML and JS in the template -Fast and lightweight -Reuse into existing apps Issues : potential for issues / errors in the codebase for teams working on a big project | |||||||
Vanilla | Plain javascript | Team has minimal expeirence | -Very simple -Lack of features means doing some things can escelate quickly | -Extremely well documented as used within all other options | Free | N/A | |||||||
NodeJS | JavaScript runtime enviorment | Joshua has minimal experience |
| Very well documented as extremely commonly used | Free + open source | Allows integration of other libraries and frameworks easily |