←back to thread

282 points bundie | 3 comments | | HN request time: 0.422s | source
1. b0a04gl ◴[] No.44384403[source]
supertokens did the same thing from bengaluru. didn’t start loud. just showed up with clean abstractions that didn’t leak. you could tell someone had wrestled with real auth mess before touching a single line. it worked, across teams, stacks, workflows

better auth gives off the same shape. that gets well adopted because it survives scaling without needing a rewrite

same pattern and diff origin place. someone holding the whole stack in their head long enough to ship something

replies(2): >>44385754 #>>44397988 #
2. lukeh ◴[] No.44385754[source]
I like that last sentence!
3. 5Qn8mNbc2FNCiVV ◴[] No.44397988[source]
Too bad that the Supertokens docs became an absolute dumpster fire with their "recipes" and reading the source made me lose confidence in the product's quality to rely on.

Not saying better-auth is strictly better, but at least you can read the docs and know what you're getting into yourself instead of 12 variations of the same thing