Skip to content

This issue was moved to a discussion.

You can continue the conversation there. Go to discussion →

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[✨] SST Integration - Adapter configuration for Qwik City #79

Closed
thejackshelton opened this issue May 13, 2023 · 3 comments
Closed

[✨] SST Integration - Adapter configuration for Qwik City #79

thejackshelton opened this issue May 13, 2023 · 3 comments
Labels
[STAGE-2] incomplete implementation Remove this label when implementation is complete [STAGE-2] not fully covered by tests yet Remove this label when tests are verified to cover the implementation [STAGE-2] unresolved discussions left Remove this label when all critical discussions are resolved on the issue [STAGE-3] docs changes not added yet Remove this label when the necessary documentation for the feature / change is added [STAGE-3] missing 2 reviews for RFC PRs Remove this label when at least 2 core team members reviewed and approved the RFC implementation

Comments

@thejackshelton
Copy link
Member

thejackshelton commented May 13, 2023

Is your feature request related to a problem?

For the past several weeks We've been conversing with the devs over at SST to try and get an integration with Qwik City.

Along the way some fellow Qwik community members have joined in. Including @KenAKAFrosty

SST is a thin layer between AWS that allows you to add any AWS service, db, auth, api, etc.

Frank is an awesome developer over at SST that recently finished a Svelte integration and started working on one with Qwik City for us.

You can find our recent conversation here.
https://discord.com/channels/842438759945601056/991805589623668758/1106591648990887996

I can also toss a discord invite to the channel where we've been conversing in SST.

Describe the solution you'd like

The ability to have an sst-adapter in a separate repo for Qwik City. Along with SST added as an option for the deployments section of the Qwik ecosystem.

Describe alternatives you've considered

Frank considered having the adapter in the same repo, but found that it would slow down the process of finding/fixing bugs.

Hit into a blocker... it seems adapters need to live within qwik's repo. That's going to make the adapter a bit tricky to maintain and push out quick fixes ⁠Builder.io⁠
Do u have an example of any "community-managed adapters" that lives in independent repos?
^ to add some context, we felt this w/ Astro. Originally, our Astro adapter lived in Astro's repo, and bug fixes took weeks to get approved.

@adamdbradley have any insights or guidance that I can relay to Frank? An integration here would be awesome for people deploying to AWS with Qwik

Additional context

After finding out how powerful SST was (and that it's open source), I saw huge potential for an integration with Qwik.

Especially since Qwik apps are instantly interactive and performant at scale, I think both projects align well together for company and enterprise level software development.

I was excited to see that most people in the community agree. Including @steve8708!

If there's anything I can do to help get this one step further let me know!

@NicoPowers
Copy link

Any updates on this? This would be amazing, been using SST and since its built on top of AWS-CDK, developers can literally build ANY kind of infrastructure with SST + AWS-CDK. No more switching between different infrastructure platforms that just leverage AWS under the hood anyways, and don't even have all the features one may need.

@thejackshelton
Copy link
Member Author

thejackshelton commented Oct 2, 2023

Hey @NicoPowers! No updates unfortunately. I believe there needs to be some knowledge from the SST side on how to setup the adapter. I remember Frank from the SST team looked at it for a little bit but was super busy. If you're interested I would reach out to him about contributing to a Qwik integration.

@gioboa
Copy link
Member

gioboa commented Oct 14, 2024

We moved this issue to qwik-evolution repo to create a RFC discussion for this.
Here is our Qwik RFC process thanks.

@gioboa gioboa transferred this issue from QwikDev/qwik Oct 14, 2024
@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this to In Progress (STAGE 2) in Qwik Evolution Oct 14, 2024
@github-actions github-actions bot added [STAGE-2] incomplete implementation Remove this label when implementation is complete [STAGE-2] not fully covered by tests yet Remove this label when tests are verified to cover the implementation [STAGE-2] unresolved discussions left Remove this label when all critical discussions are resolved on the issue [STAGE-3] docs changes not added yet Remove this label when the necessary documentation for the feature / change is added [STAGE-3] missing 2 reviews for RFC PRs Remove this label when at least 2 core team members reviewed and approved the RFC implementation labels Oct 14, 2024
@QwikDev QwikDev locked and limited conversation to collaborators Oct 14, 2024
@gioboa gioboa converted this issue into discussion #155 Oct 14, 2024
@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this from In Progress (STAGE 2) to Released as Stable (STAGE 5) in Qwik Evolution Oct 14, 2024
@shairez shairez removed this from Qwik Evolution Oct 15, 2024

This issue was moved to a discussion.

You can continue the conversation there. Go to discussion →

Labels
[STAGE-2] incomplete implementation Remove this label when implementation is complete [STAGE-2] not fully covered by tests yet Remove this label when tests are verified to cover the implementation [STAGE-2] unresolved discussions left Remove this label when all critical discussions are resolved on the issue [STAGE-3] docs changes not added yet Remove this label when the necessary documentation for the feature / change is added [STAGE-3] missing 2 reviews for RFC PRs Remove this label when at least 2 core team members reviewed and approved the RFC implementation
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants