@cameron_duley I'd love to answer the question but my reddit account got banned like 10 months ago saying it was linked to another account that was doing ban evasion (it wasn't). tldr; the top comment is correct. No production apps. tbh the direction the project is going in the moment means

@bcardarella @cameron_duley What is the motivation for keeping LiveView hard coded for HTML? If changing it would enable one stack for web & native via LV that would weigh very heavy in favor of switching, but what's the argument for keeping the current state?

@cvn791007722679 @cameron_duley I just think they don't want to do it. LiveView meets their needs and that's as far as they're willing to go. As far as I know nobody on the LiveView team has even tried to use LVN at all, at the very least nobody on that project has indicated to me they have tried it.

@bcardarella @cameron_duley Sounds like we need to do another call sometime 😅

@jamonholmgren @cameron_duley Definitely, let's wait until I have something to show you. It's coming together quickly in some areas, others are requiring some heavy lifting.

@cameron_duley I just want to add some qualification to the "no production apps" In a few presentations I did say it was production ready as it was passing all LiveView tests with the exception of nested LiveViews, LiveComponents, and some streaming stuff. This all works perfectly fine. We do

@bcardarella @cameron_duley I have said more than once that it would probably be best if LVN did not build on LiveView, exactly because LiveView has made trade-offs specific to the browser-html rendering pipeline. Me (and others) also suggested building on top of the same abstraction instead (channels).

@bcardarella @cameron_duley Thank you for you honest answer and hard work!

@bcardarella @cameron_duley Sad to hear that. Really exciting ambitious project 😞