Document distinguishing features from alternatives about aura HOT 5 CLOSED

As a new comer to the JavaScript web app development world, this would be very helpful to me. I have been trying to infer these differences myself but am still a bit vague on what Aura does differently compared to the other libraries. TodoMVC helped me a lot in evaluating JavaScript MV* frameworks. Now I want a TodoMVC for all these Backbone libraries! If Aura would provide documentation that explains things from its angle in comparison to the others, that would really help.

from aura.

Closest thing to this at the moment is http://lostechies.com/derickbailey/2012/06/13/why-should-i-use-backbone-marionette-instead-of-%E2%80%A6/, but it doesn't cover Aura just yet, We'll address this soon.

from aura.

Not sure this one still applies to where Aura is headed.. As Aura is not really an alternative to these other frameworks

from aura.

I would change the title on this, but we do need to properly document where Aura fits. At minimum we need a single sentence that articulates what it offers in a way that is easily understandable, but ideally longer docs.

Challenges:

• Aura is a widget assembler - "what does that mean? It puts widgets together? is it a build process?"
• Aura is an architecture for scaling apps - "so does it do MVC? what does it give me that MVC doesn't?"
• Aura is glue layer between widgets - "isn't RequireJS a glue layer between modules/widgets?"

from aura.

We've had this discussion in a few places. I'm going to try capturing in the readme.

from aura.