mirror of
https://github.com/pacnpal/thrillwiki_django_no_react.git
synced 2025-12-20 15:51:08 -05:00
162 lines
3.4 KiB
Markdown
162 lines
3.4 KiB
Markdown
# ADR 001: Frontend Architecture - HTMX + AlpineJS
|
|
|
|
## Status
|
|
Accepted
|
|
|
|
## Context
|
|
The ThrillWiki platform needs a frontend architecture that:
|
|
- Provides dynamic user interactions
|
|
- Maintains server-side rendering benefits
|
|
- Enables progressive enhancement
|
|
- Keeps complexity manageable
|
|
- Ensures fast page loads
|
|
- Supports SEO requirements
|
|
|
|
## Decision
|
|
Implement frontend using HTMX + AlpineJS + Tailwind CSS instead of a traditional SPA framework (React, Vue, Angular).
|
|
|
|
### Technology Choices
|
|
1. HTMX
|
|
- Server-side rendering with dynamic updates
|
|
- Progressive enhancement
|
|
- Simple integration with Django templates
|
|
- Reduced JavaScript complexity
|
|
|
|
2. AlpineJS
|
|
- Lightweight client-side interactivity
|
|
- Simple state management
|
|
- Easy integration with HTMX
|
|
- Minimal learning curve
|
|
|
|
3. Tailwind CSS
|
|
- Utility-first styling
|
|
- Consistent design system
|
|
- Easy customization
|
|
- Optimized production builds
|
|
|
|
## Consequences
|
|
|
|
### Positive
|
|
1. Performance
|
|
- Faster initial page loads
|
|
- Reduced client-side processing
|
|
- Smaller JavaScript bundle
|
|
- Better Core Web Vitals
|
|
|
|
2. Development
|
|
- Simpler architecture
|
|
- Faster development cycles
|
|
- Easier debugging
|
|
- Better Django integration
|
|
|
|
3. Maintenance
|
|
- Less complex state management
|
|
- Reduced dependency management
|
|
- Easier team onboarding
|
|
- More maintainable codebase
|
|
|
|
4. SEO
|
|
- Server-rendered content
|
|
- Better crawler compatibility
|
|
- Improved accessibility
|
|
- Faster indexing
|
|
|
|
### Negative
|
|
1. Limited Complex UI
|
|
- More complex for rich interactions
|
|
- Less ecosystem support
|
|
- Fewer UI components available
|
|
- Some patterns need custom solutions
|
|
|
|
2. Development Patterns
|
|
- New patterns needed
|
|
- Different mental model
|
|
- Some developer familiarity issues
|
|
- Custom solutions needed
|
|
|
|
## Alternatives Considered
|
|
|
|
### React SPA
|
|
- Pros:
|
|
* Rich ecosystem
|
|
* Component libraries
|
|
* Developer familiarity
|
|
* Advanced tooling
|
|
- Cons:
|
|
* Complex setup
|
|
* Heavy client-side
|
|
* SEO challenges
|
|
* Performance overhead
|
|
|
|
### Vue.js
|
|
- Pros:
|
|
* Progressive framework
|
|
* Good ecosystem
|
|
* Easy learning curve
|
|
* Good performance
|
|
- Cons:
|
|
* Still too heavy
|
|
* Complex build setup
|
|
* Server integration challenges
|
|
* Unnecessary complexity
|
|
|
|
## Implementation Approach
|
|
|
|
### Integration Strategy
|
|
1. Server-Side
|
|
```python
|
|
# Django View
|
|
class ParksView(TemplateView):
|
|
def get(self, request, *args, **kwargs):
|
|
return JsonResponse() if is_htmx() else render()
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
2. Client-Side
|
|
```html
|
|
<!-- Template -->
|
|
<div hx-get="/parks"
|
|
hx-trigger="load"
|
|
x-data="{ filtered: false }">
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
### Performance Optimization
|
|
1. Initial Load
|
|
- Server-side rendering
|
|
- Progressive enhancement
|
|
- Critical CSS inline
|
|
- Deferred JavaScript
|
|
|
|
2. Subsequent Interactions
|
|
- Partial page updates
|
|
- Smart caching
|
|
- Optimistic UI updates
|
|
- Background processing
|
|
|
|
## Monitoring and Success Metrics
|
|
|
|
### Performance Metrics
|
|
- First Contentful Paint < 1.5s
|
|
- Time to Interactive < 2s
|
|
- Core Web Vitals compliance
|
|
- Server response times
|
|
|
|
### Development Metrics
|
|
- Development velocity
|
|
- Bug frequency
|
|
- Code complexity
|
|
- Build times
|
|
|
|
## Future Considerations
|
|
|
|
### Enhancement Opportunities
|
|
1. Short-term
|
|
- Component library
|
|
- Pattern documentation
|
|
- Performance optimization
|
|
- Developer tools
|
|
|
|
2. Long-term
|
|
- Advanced patterns
|
|
- Custom extensions
|
|
- Build optimizations
|
|
- Tool improvements |