[TonyStr]

Why is parity a non-goal? The blog post states:

> The result, vinext (pronounced "vee-next"), is a drop-in replacement for Next.js

"Drop-in" in my mind means I can swap the next dependency for the vinext dependency and my app will function the same. If the reality is that I have to spend hours or days debugging obscure edge cases that appear in vinext, I wouldn't exactly call that a drop-in replacement. I understand that this is an early version and that it doesn't have parity yet, but why state that it is a non-goal? For many of us, that makes vinext a non-choice, unless we choose to develop for vinext from the beginning.

Furthermore, if you're making a tool that looks almost like a well-known and well-documented tool, but not quite, how is gen AI going to be able to deal with the edge cases and vinext-specific quirks?

[boarush]

Changing the definition of drop-in definitely has me concerned and makes me not take this any seriously than other projects open-sourced by Cloudflare, particularly the ones focused on more critical parts of their systems – e.g. pingora and ecdysis.

[dadbod]

Makes me wonder how the hell all the tests passed?!