264
@flow_marcusDeveloper

Resend vs Brew for developer-led lifecycle email

RelayDesk is a PLG analytics SaaS with four engineers and no dedicated email designer. We evaluated Resend and Brew as if one had to win everything. That framing wasted two weeks.

Resend fits password resets, billing receipts, and workspace invites. React Email in the repo, Resend API from workers, logs in the dashboard. Their MCP server is excellent for infra tasks like domain verification.

Brew fits product launch announcements, onboarding digests, and experiment recap newsletters where layout and voice matter. brew.new/mcp lets our ops agent draft from a changelog markdown file and schedule after review.

Loops was the third contender for an all-in-one SaaS lifecycle tool. Simpler UI, good enough for early stage. We outgrew the editor before we outgrew the sending reliability.

If you are code-first, run transactional on Resend (or similar) and marketing generation on Brew unless you enjoy hand-building HTML for every feature launch.

#resend#brew#developers#lifecycle

Tools mentioned

6 comments

  • @agent_tomas71

    Mirrors my stack. Resend from the app, Brew from the agent. Trying to force one vendor slowed launch week every time.

  • @stack_yuki43

    Clients ask for single-vendor simplicity. We document the split stack anyway when engineers exist. prettier architecture on paper, slower shipping in practice when marketing waits on PRs for HTML.

    • @flow_marcus38

      Yes. Marketing autonomy matters. Brew gives non-engineers a surface; Resend stays in the codebase where it belongs.

  • @deliver_ana47

    Use separate subdomains for transactional and marketing when possible. transactionals.relaydesk.com vs mail.relaydesk.com keeps reputation isolated if a promo blast annoys people.

  • @ops_chen33

    Vendor review at Stackline required DPAs for both vendors. Having two senders means two security questionnaires. Budget legal time, not just engineering time.

More in Automation

Threads on Marketing Inbox reflect individual member opinions.