FlowRipple is a visual workflow automation platform designed for building and managing complex workflows without code. It features a drag-and-drop interface for connecting pre-built blocks representing various actions, including integrations with popular apps, webhooks, and custom code execution. FlowRipple aims to simplify automation for both technical and non-technical users, allowing them to automate tasks, connect services, and streamline processes across their work or personal projects. Its visual nature offers a clear overview of the workflow logic and facilitates easier debugging and modification.
Nullboard is a simple Kanban board implemented entirely within a single HTML file. It uses local storage to persist data, eliminating the need for a server or external dependencies. The board allows users to create, edit, and move tasks between customizable columns, offering a lightweight and portable solution for personal task management. Its minimalist design and focus on core Kanban principles make it easy to use and deploy virtually anywhere a web browser is available.
Hacker News commenters generally praised Nullboard for its simplicity and self-contained nature, finding it a refreshing alternative to complex project management software. Several appreciated the lack of JavaScript, noting its speed and security benefits. Some suggested potential improvements, such as adding basic features like task dependencies, due dates, or collaborative editing, while acknowledging the potential trade-off with the current minimalist design. A few pointed out the limitations of using local storage and the potential for data loss, recommending alternative storage methods for more robust usage. Others highlighted the value for personal task management or small teams, where simplicity trumps feature richness. The ability to easily modify and customize the HTML was also seen as a positive.
Summary of Comments ( 35 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43139138
Hacker News users discussed the complexity of visual programming tools like FlowRipple, with some arguing that text-based systems, despite their steeper learning curve, offer greater flexibility and control for complex automations. Concerns were raised about vendor lock-in with proprietary platforms and the potential difficulties of debugging visual workflows. The lack of a free tier and the high pricing for FlowRipple's paid plans were also criticized, with comparisons made to cheaper or open-source alternatives. Some commenters expressed interest in seeing more technical details about the platform's implementation, particularly regarding its handling of complex branching logic and error handling. Others praised the clean UI and the potential usefulness of such a tool for non-programmers, but ultimately felt the current offering was too expensive for individual users or small businesses.
The Hacker News post "Show HN: I Built a Visual Workflow Automation Platform – FlowRipple" generated several comments discussing the platform and related topics.
Several commenters expressed interest in the project and offered positive feedback. One user appreciated the clean UI and found the platform intriguing, especially the ability to create custom components. They inquired about the underlying technology used to build FlowRipple. Another commenter praised the project for focusing on self-hosting and using local storage instead of relying on cloud services, a feature they considered valuable.
The discussion also delved into technical details and comparisons with existing tools. One user compared FlowRipple to n8n, another visual workflow automation tool, highlighting potential benefits of FlowRipple. Another commenter discussed the challenges of building such a platform, acknowledging the complexities involved in creating a robust and user-friendly system. They specifically mentioned the difficulty of handling errors effectively, prompting the creator to explain their approach to error management within FlowRipple.
Some users questioned the choice of certain technologies, particularly the use of React for the front-end and Go for the backend, expressing concerns about potential performance bottlenecks and suggesting alternatives. The creator responded to these concerns, explaining the rationale behind their technology choices and outlining plans for future development and optimization.
Furthermore, a discussion emerged around the business model and potential future development of FlowRipple. One commenter asked about plans for monetization, suggesting a potential market for a self-hosted version, especially among developers. Another user inquired about the intended user base for FlowRipple, suggesting its suitability for technical users familiar with automation tools.
The creator actively participated in the discussion, responding to questions and providing further insights into the platform's features, development process, and future plans. They acknowledged the feedback received and expressed openness to incorporating suggestions from the community. Overall, the comments reflect a positive reception to FlowRipple, with users expressing interest in its development and offering constructive feedback for improvement.