While it's a valuable book for being the first one dedicated to Seneca.js, the book lacks depth in a few necessary areas and its Node.js-related code examples are sloppy. I submitted errata three times within the first hundred pages and after that I just gave up on making corrections. While most of the bugs in the code examples and step-by-step walkthroughs are recoverable if you have some experience with the technologies (ie, forgetting to tell you to start node-inspector before launching your node application with debug options, OR putting spaces after command line option hyphens), there are some flaws in the code that are due to the Seneca API changing a month or so before this book was published (ie, Seneca Entity was broken apart from the Seneca library and must be explicitly required and "seneca.used()" into your code). Another major knock on this book isn't a knock against the author but against the fact that "proofreaders" (as well as "technical reviewers") at Packt Publishing rarely seem to do their job, and this book was the worst I've ever seen for one of their books correcting consistent English grammar and vocabulary mistakes. You can certainly understand the book, but again it contributes to an overall feeling of sloppiness and lack of attention on the part of someone specifically listed in the book credits as a "proofreader".
The content the author chose was outstanding and it's an exciting subject. His sampling of Seneca, working in it's integration with express.js, using PM2 and docker to manage and deploy an application made this a very useful book. Working through the code examples is definitely worthwhile to learn the framework, though again, be warned, you have to spend some time pushing through it (because it seems unfortunately the technical reviewer never did). The latter chapters of the book are very clean and very informative on the devops side of things, and it was one of the more valuable sections of the book.
Overall it's a good resource, but the faults that keep me personally from giving this book higher marks are clearly the fault of the publisher and reviewers for failing to do their job.