@remix-run/react vs astro
Side-by-side comparison of @remix-run/react and astro
- Weekly Downloads
- 426.2K
- Stars
- 32.3K
- Gzip Size
- 120.6 kB
- License
- MIT
- Last Updated
- 1d ago
- Open Issues
- 44
- Forks
- 2.7K
- Unpacked Size
- 374.4 kB
- Dependencies
- 12
- Weekly Downloads
- 1.2M
- Stars
- 56.6K
- Gzip Size
- —
- License
- MIT
- Last Updated
- 7h ago
- Open Issues
- 233
- Forks
- 3.1K
- Unpacked Size
- 2.5 MB
- Dependencies
- —
Download Trends
Verdict
@remix-run/react is a solid choice for developers working within the Remix ecosystem, especially those aiming to leverage React for server-rendered applications. It offers a streamlined approach for building web applications with strong integration to Remix features, making it particularly appealing for teams invested in this framework.
On the other hand, astro excels in creating modern static websites with a focus on performance and developer experience. It caters to a broader audience, including those interested in hybrid applications and static site generation, making it a versatile option for diverse project needs.
For larger projects or teams familiar with server-side rendering in React, @remix-run/react is likely more suitable. However, for projects requiring a flexible site builder with modern practices, astro may serve better. Consider the specific requirements and team expertise when choosing between these frameworks.
Detailed Comparison
| Criteria | @remix-run/react | astro |
|---|---|---|
| Version | Stable version with minor updates | ✓More recent version indicating active development |
| Categories | Meta Framework with a specific focus | ✓Meta Framework spanning broader use cases |
| Description | Designed for React applications with Remix support | ✓Focuses on modern site building and static site generation |
| Open Issues | ✓44 open issues suggest manageable maintenance | 226 open issues indicate room for improvement |
| GitHub Forks | 2.7K forks indicate moderate community contributions | ✓3.1K forks demonstrate higher engagement |
| GitHub Stars | 32.2K stars show good community interest | ✓56.6K stars suggest a more extensive community and support |
| Unpacked Size | ✓Smaller size at 374.4 kB for lightweight installations | Larger size at 2.5 MB could imply more features |
| Target Use Cases | Best for React-based server rendering | ✓Ideal for static site generation and hybrid apps |
| Weekly Downloads | 423.8K weekly downloads reflect steady use | ✓1.2M weekly downloads indicate greater popularity |
| Bundle Size (gzip) | ✓More optimized at 120.6 kB | Bundle size is expected to be larger but is not provided |