I Almost Got Fired for Choosing React in Our Enterprise App (opens in new tab)

Why was the consultant/dev even allowed to pick React for what sounds like a Microsoft shop most familiar with desktop development? It's the responsibility of the consultant to suggest the most suitable tech stack, not go along whatever idea the client CxO has conjured up in his mind or whatever tool they tinker with for their personal projects.

Microsoft has a robust ecosystem for developing web apps, and I'm pretty sure the most sane thing would have been migrating to a .net based web framework and not React. Even a cursory talk with the customers outsurcing partner would probably have confirmed this. Instead, a poorly understood tool was used that the outsurcing partner has little to no experience with.

This is not the first time that I see an article already posted not so long ago reposted through the betterprogramming.pub url.

Edit: another example:

Initial post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26314756

Repost with the betterprogramming.pub url: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26369441

Second repost, this time with an edited title : https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26412047

Few things in our industry are future-proof (or even future-resistant) and the stated indictment against Angular over the v1 to v2 changes is unreasonable even at the time.

These decisions are important but it looks like the author lost (or maybe never had) significant influence over them. The ability to influence key stakeholders over critical design decisions using rational (and evidence based) arguments is an important precursor to a successful project. It’s still possible to ship large projects without it, but it makes for a very challenging environment.

Optimized headline aside, I appreciate this summary because it highlights some of the nontechnical challenges in building larger applications.