Head-to-Head: Docusaurus vs UmiJS Analysis

@docusaurus/core

v3.4.0(20 days ago)

This package is actively maintained.The package doesn't have any types definitionsNumber of direct dependencies: 68Monthly npm downloads

@docusaurus/core is a powerful tool for building and maintaining documentation websites. It provides a simple and customizable framework for creating static sites with a focus on documentation. With features like built-in search, versioning, and internationalization support, @docusaurus/core streamlines the process of creating and managing documentation projects.

Alternatives:
vuepress+
gatsby+
next+
nuxt+
hexo+
gitbook+
hugo+
jekyll+
sapper+
gridsome+

Tags: documentationwebsitestatic-sitegeneratoropen-source

umi

v4.2.11(6 days ago)

This package is actively maintained.Types definitions are bundled with the npm packageNumber of direct dependencies: 12Monthly npm downloads

Umi is a comprehensive front-end development framework that streamlines the creation of React applications. It offers a plugin-based architecture, allowing developers to extend and customize their projects easily. Umi provides features like routing, state management, and build optimization out of the box, reducing the need for manual configuration. Its convention over configuration approach simplifies project setup and maintenance.

Alternatives:
next.js+
nuxt.js+
create-react-app+
gatsby+
blitz+
remix+
vite+
sapper+
redwoodjs+
quasar+

Tags: javascriptframeworkreactfront-endplugin-based

Fight!

Popularity

Both @docusaurus/core and umi are popular npm packages in the JavaScript community. However, umi is more widely used and has gained significant popularity due to its versatility and extensive ecosystem.

Purpose

@docusaurus/core is specifically designed for building documentation websites. It provides a streamlined and easy-to-use framework for creating static documentation sites. On the other hand, umi is a comprehensive front-end development framework that can be used for building various types of web applications, including single-page applications, server-side rendered applications, and more.

Scalability

Both @docusaurus/core and umi are scalable and can handle large projects. However, umi is more suitable for complex and enterprise-level applications due to its modular architecture and extensive plugin system. @docusaurus/core is optimized for building documentation sites and may have limitations when it comes to scaling to larger and more complex applications.

Developer Experience

Both packages offer a good developer experience, but they have different approaches. @docusaurus/core provides a simple and intuitive configuration-based approach, making it easy for developers to get started with building documentation sites. Umi, on the other hand, offers a more flexible and configurable development experience with powerful features like automatic routing, plugin system, and support for various front-end technologies.

Community and Ecosystem

Umi has a larger and more active community compared to @docusaurus/core. It has a rich ecosystem of plugins and extensions that can enhance the development experience and provide additional functionality. @docusaurus/core also has a supportive community, but its ecosystem is more focused on documentation-related plugins and themes.

Learning Curve

Both @docusaurus/core and umi have a learning curve, but @docusaurus/core is generally easier to learn and get started with, especially for developers who are specifically looking to build documentation sites. Umi, being a more comprehensive framework, may require more time and effort to fully grasp its concepts and utilize its advanced features.