← All thoughts

XV.The Good Bag diary · October 2026

I got into Lovable SheBuilds. My hackathon starts after bedtime.

Three days to build a product. Or, in my case, three nights after work and bedtime. The Good Bag is coming to Lovable SheBuilds. My calendar has some notes.

By Gisella Famà · 5 min read · The Good Bag diary

I applied to Lovable SheBuilds with The Good Bag, and I got accepted. Which is exciting. It is also the moment an idea stops being a pleasant thing to think about and becomes something you have to fit into an actual week.

The hackathon is three days. I have a job. There is bedtime. So my version starts this Thursday after bedtime, when the working day is over and the house has hopefully stopped issuing requests. Three days of building, translated into three nights of very deliberate scope management.

"The brief says three days. My calendar says after bedtime. Both can be true."

A small bag with a surprisingly large problem

The Good Bag starts with kids' party bags. Party bags are brilliant. The stuff inside them, less so. A handful of things bought in a rush, briefly celebrated, then quietly absorbed into the household's growing collection of plastic objects with no obvious purpose.

I want to make the better options easier to find: fun, useful, more sustainable fillers from independent shops. Toys, treats, books, crafts, small things children might actually keep. Not a lecture about being a better parent. Parents have enough tabs open, literally and emotionally.

The shorthand is a 'Skyscanner for kids' party bags'. A place to discover options without visiting fifteen shops and rebuilding the comparison in your head. You can see the project at The Good Bag.

The bigger vision is to help people find combinations by age and budget, and eventually build and order complete bags in one place. Eventually is doing important work in that sentence. It is not all going into three evenings.

Preparation is mostly deciding what not to build

There is a dangerous version of hackathon preparation where you arrive with an enormous feature list and call it ambition. I know this version. It produces a very convincing plan and a product with six unfinished beginnings.

What I want to prepare instead is a clear first journey: a parent arrives, finds suitable fillers, and leaves with a useful decision. That is the job. Everything else has to explain why it deserves a slice of the time between bedtime and my own bedtime.

—

Define the smallest useful journey. Finding something suitable matters more than making every possible screen exist.

—

Get the product information in order. Age, price, materials and shop details need to mean something. A lovely card with vague information is still extra work for the parent.

—

Choose what to learn. Is browsing by budget more helpful than ready-made combinations? I would rather test that than spend a night perfecting a feature nobody asked for.

—

Keep the bigger vision separate from the first version. One is direction. The other is a promise I might actually keep by the end of the hackathon.

"The constraint isn't whether I can generate another screen. It's whether that screen earns one of my evenings."

AI makes building faster. It does not make the decisions disappear.

This is the part of building with Lovable that interests me as a designer. The distance between an idea and something I can click is much shorter. I can try a flow in the actual product instead of describing it in a deck and hoping everyone imagines the same thing.

But faster execution makes it easier to build the wrong thing, too. If I haven't decided what the parent needs to compare, generating a filter panel is not progress. It is a very efficient way to make my uncertainty interactive.

I still have to choose the information that matters, decide what claims I can support, and notice when something looks delightful but makes the task harder. The machine can help me build the directory. It cannot decide what makes a party-bag filler worth recommending.

Three nights, not a productivity morality tale

I am excited about being accepted. I am excited about the deadline, too: a short window gives an idea somewhere to go. There is something useful about saying 'this is the version I will try now' rather than keeping every possibility alive indefinitely.

What I am not doing is presenting after-bedtime building as the ideal way to work. It is the time I have for this project. That means the scope has to respect it. A smaller working product is a better result than an impressive collection of unfinished features and a designer who cannot remember her own password.

The plan is to use the first night to get the core journey working, the second to make the information and choices useful, and the third to test, cut, and finish. This is a plan, not a retrospective. I reserve the right to discover that night two is mostly fixing something from night one.

What I want to have at the end

Not proof that I can build an entire business in 72 hours. A version of The Good Bag that a parent can use, react to, and tell me honestly where it helps and where it doesn't. Something concrete enough to learn from, rather than another idea waiting for a less busy week.

So: accepted into SheBuilds, preparing the essentials, keeping the ambition and cutting the scope. Thursday after bedtime, I start. A small bag, a real problem, and three nights to see how much of the useful bit I can make real.

Disagree? That's the point. Tell me why.

← Back to all thoughts