Feature Description

🗣️ through user feedback we have learned that the syntax and behavior of route registration and expiration is a much discussed topic

depending on which frameworks/programming languages the developers have had good experiences with, they want syntax and behavior that is close to what they know and have had positive experiences with.

💡the idea

is to address the problem by creating the possibility to use different router syntax and/or behavior via contribution packages

with this it should be possible to use different concepts of route registration syntax like a laravel router or other routers like a radix tree router, which has a completely different behavior when processing the routes.

🔢 steps necessary to make it possible

• a router interface must be created that includes the api's that the framework needs to run
• all api's of the framework which are needed by the router have to be prepared for the expose to the outside (please design in a way that
  there are no major changes are expected in the future, so that backwards compatibility is always given)

📒 Sidenote:

• the express router is the only one included in the core package, which also corresponds to the interface of the other routers.
• this is used as default without thw need of any user configuration

❔ Not yet defined

• the way the router will be registered is not yet clear
• will prepare some proposals/examples
• it is also unclear whether the app in the first level can still be used directly for routing or should always be called app.Router()

Related issues
#2190
#2200
#1829

Code Snippet (optional)

package main

import "github.com/gofiber/fiber/v2"
import "log"

func main() {
  app := fiber.New()

  // An example to describe the feature

  log.Fatal(app.Listen(":3000"))
}

Checklist:

• I agree to follow Fiber's Code of Conduct.
• I have checked for existing issues that describe my suggestion prior to opening this one.
• I understand that improperly formatted feature requests may be closed without explanation.