Overview

This document outlines the selected platforms and technologies for the RA/TA/LA Matching Web Application. The selection is based on criteria such as ease of use, scalability, and integration capabilities.

Platform Components

Component Technology
Front-End Technologies Flutter (Web Interface)
Back-End Technologies Firebase (Google Cloud)
Database Components Firebase Firestore (NoSQL)
DevOps GitHub Actions (CI/CD Pipeline)
Deployment GitHub Pages (Free Hosting)

Front-End Technologies

Technology Pros Cons
Flutter
  • Cross-Platform Development: Single codebase for web and mobile platforms.
  • Rich UI: Widget-based architecture enhances user experience.
  • Community Support: Growing community with resources and plugins.
  • Relatively new compared to other front-end technologies, which may result in fewer established best practices.
React
  • Strong Component-Based Architecture: Easy to manage and maintain components.
  • Large Ecosystem: Wide range of libraries and support.
  • Responsive UI: High performance with responsive UI development.
  • State management can become complex in larger applications.

Decision: We selected Flutter for the front-end due to its cross-platform capabilities, ensuring consistency between web and mobile versions, and its rich, customizable UI, which provides an engaging user experience.

Back-End Technologies

Technology Pros Cons
Firebase
  • Serverless Architecture: Simplifies backend management and reduces operational overhead.
  • Real-Time Capabilities: Supports real-time data updates, enhancing user experience.
  • Scalability: Automatically scales based on demand.
  • Limited flexibility for server-side logic and customizations.
  • Vendor lock-in due to heavy reliance on Google Cloud services.
Node.js with Express
  • JavaScript-Based: Easy integration with JavaScript front-end.
  • Non-Blocking Architecture: High performance for real-time applications.
  • Requires careful management of asynchronous code.
  • Potential for callback hell in complex applications.

Decision: Firebase was selected for the backend due to its real-time capabilities, serverless architecture, and ease of integration with the rest of the Google Cloud ecosystem, which aligns with our need for scalability and simplicity.

Database Components

Technology Pros Cons
Firebase Firestore
  • Flexible Data Model: NoSQL allows for a flexible schema design.
  • Real-Time Synchronization: Data synchronization across clients.
  • Integration: Seamless integration with other Firebase services.
  • Complex querying capabilities are limited compared to SQL databases.
  • High read and write costs if the data structure is not optimized.
Cosmos DB (Azure)
  • Managed Service: Fully managed and scalable, supporting multiple data models.
  • Global Distribution: Supports globally distributed applications.
  • Higher costs for large-scale usage.
  • Less flexibility in customization compared to open-source solutions.

Decision: Firebase Firestore was chosen as the database for its flexibility and integration with the rest of the Firebase platform, providing a consistent and real-time experience for data synchronization.

Cloud Platform

Technology Pros Cons
Firebase (Google Cloud)
  • Integrated Services: Seamless integration with Firebase and other Google Cloud services.
  • Scalable Solutions: Scales based on application needs.
  • Real-Time Data: Effective real-time database services.
  • Vendor lock-in may lead to long-term dependency on Google services.
  • Higher costs for large-scale applications.
Azure
  • Strong Integration: Excellent support for deploying and managing services.
  • Media Services: Robust support for video and media processing.
  • Costs can escalate with high computational requirements.

Decision: Google Cloud was selected for its seamless integration with Firebase, scalability, and ease of use, which supports our real-time, data-driven requirements.

Conclusion

The selected platforms and technologies for the RA/TA/LA Matching Web Application have been chosen to ensure a seamless development process, scalability, and ease of use. This stack will facilitate efficient collaboration among developers and provide an excellent user experience for both students and faculty.