If I was running Merkle my #1 priority would be making it very easy to build standalone farcaster apps with free signups and no external wallet

Asking users to create a Farcaster wallet and use it for financial things is never going to work. It’s an inferior product and inferior social experience to all other options. 

What will actually work is Bade app mini apps and using cb wallet as the wallet 

Fc mini apps are broken with wallet connect which everyone wants to use and they don’t work with cb wallet connect which

I would not invest dev into fc mini apps over cb wallet mini apps

building @teller 





























































hosting /kieran /usdc /loans /disclosure 🛸

Yeah option to use your own wallet is probably good.

What is a cb wallet mini app? They are all farcaster mini apps and work on both

Technowatermelon. Elder Millenial. Building Farcaster. 

nf.td/varun

Ya so I also thought this and we built an entire FC mini app and then found out it’s not the same SDK as cb wallet mini apps 

Ran into issues with external wallet connect in FC mini app and abandoned it and now building a cb wallet mini apps 

@v might wanna add in FC mini app docs that it’s NOT the same as CB wallet SDK — I’ve had this convo 5 times now and degen ran into the same issue <3

they built an sdk, it wraps our sdk

so yes they are different but theirs wraps ours and is compatible, any incompatibility is a temporary bug

@farcaster dev / dad / books, cooks, ski, code ~ there are many things of which a wise man might wish to be ignorant

well probably be forced to push our own opinionated sdk (while still having the unopionated one so multiple clients can build on it) that does things like picks a framework (react), sets up flows to work in standalone apps, etc in order to stay competitive in devx

simpler devx to bundle it, also lets base push some base specific features (ideally these gracefully degrade in non Base clients but likely will take some time to sort out)

What is the advantage of it being a wrapper versus just adding another sdk for functionality not included in the original?

The issue is no one is going to use fc wallet so if you’re not supporting external wallet connect on fc mini apps then it’s a non starter. 

Then with cb wallet mini apps, their wallet has distribution to users with money and it will work imo 

So the issue is if we build one on cb wallet then I don’t see how that will work on FC without allowing external wallet connect 

We wasted like a month of dev work and low are starting on CB wallet mini app because the fc doesn’t work. It’s been a rough experience. 

So I guess we will focus on cb wallet mini app and hope it works on fc client eventually, but we would never default to fc wallet that’s a non starter for a financial product at this time

good call re clarifying comms

you should be able to build using either SDK and it should be available in both places

if that is not the case for some specific functionality it will be a high priority for us to fix

Would highly recommended communicating this through your dev channels. 

Multiple teams have started building fc mini apps and then have stopped because they aren’t compatible 

Ai agents are telling people the sdks aren’t compatible 

To confirm: we don’t need to rebuild or fc mini app? Or we need to build a base app version and then that works with fc?