No description
Comprehensive technical comparison showing why EJS+React CDN widgets is the right choice for this project: - One codebase, simpler deployment, no CORS/proxy config - Server-side sessions more secure than client-side Supabase auth - Preserves audit logging, client portal, CI/CD, tests, observability - Identifies bugs in Hermes' React code: deprecated createBrowserRouter, React 17/18 API mismatch, Bootstrap deps missing, SQL injection risk, no CSRF protection, useEffect redirect anti-pattern Recommendation: Keep EJS widgets architecture, migrate to React gradually by embedding components in EJS views loaded via CDN. |
||
|---|---|---|
| .github/workflows | ||
| supabase | ||
| webapp | ||
| AGENT_COMMS.md | ||
| AGENT_INSIGHTS.md | ||
| AGENT_NOTES.md | ||
| AGENTS.md | ||
| ARCHITECTURE.md | ||
| COLLAB.md | ||
| docker-compose.yml | ||
| freightdesk-repo-sync.sh | ||