vite uses Rollup, and I think it's probably better too. When I see zero configuration I become less interested in a project, because I like being able to configure things.
Edit: I found this on Vite's website: "Vite plugins extends Rollup's well-designed plugin interface with a few extra Vite-specific options. As a result, you can write a Vite plugin once and have it work for both dev and build." https://vitejs.dev/guide/api-plugin.html
Parcel 2 does both: it is useful out of the box, and many projects will never need to configure it, but v2 adds a complete plugin system that lets you override and configure everything too. :)
I don’t think zero configuration is mutually exclusive with full configuration control. Zero config is often just a design exercise in setting reasonable defaults on top of a configurable system.
It could be argued that Vite is zero config because it allows you to go without a configuration file, but it says "zero config" nowhere on the site. It isn't because I want there to always be some configuration that I avoid zero config, it's because I've seen some projects like Next.js reject requests for a configuration setting that I thought were good and it has turned me off to the idea of "zero config". https://github.com/vercel/next.js/issues/7315https://github.com/vercel/next.js/issues/1109https://github.com/vercel/next.js/issues/13268
I get that. Curious, what do you think of prettier, which appears to philosophically align with next.js based on the issues you linked? Personally, prettier is more palatable specifically because it does one thing.
Edit: I found this on Vite's website: "Vite plugins extends Rollup's well-designed plugin interface with a few extra Vite-specific options. As a result, you can write a Vite plugin once and have it work for both dev and build." https://vitejs.dev/guide/api-plugin.html