I asked a similar question here earlier and had some good responses, so you might want to look at that thread (https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/angular/dawn/angular/glrlMKryAps/z0uQpwwx4EIJ)
I decided to upgrade a small proof-of-concept app from 1.3 to 1.4 before we dive into development of the real thing and also stick with ui-router (although I'm having trouble upgrading a simple app right now, so I might post a question on that if I do not figure it out soon). Perhaps if I were at the point of deploying a production application I would see all the things that were so flawed about the Angular 1.x platform that it would require a very-not-backward-compatible upgrade to Angular 2, but at this point I have zero excitement for Angular 2. It is a wrench in the works when attempting to do useful work today and justify current decisions. Google could help us out with the business case for starting an Angular 1.4 project right now, and I don't know why they do not do that. I completely agree that the rewrite of Angular should have a different name, rather than just a new number. If they could give back the number 2 to the Angular product, then it could continue on in a more backward compatible way for people who cannot afford regular major upgrades. I would be happy to have Angular 2.0 renamed Angular Components 1.0 (or even 2.0 if necessary). Then there could be an Angular 1.5, as planned, followed, perhaps, by a more major 2.1 release (retiring "Angular 2.0" as the name of any product). If anyone has access to the marketing folks on that... it sure would help those of us in the trenches to justify doing a project with Angular today and encourage more excitement for the entire product line, I suspect. --dawn On Wednesday, June 24, 2015 at 8:19:23 AM UTC-5, Kip Obenauf wrote: > > I am about to start a new project, and I am deciding which > framework/libraries to use. I have evaluated ReactJS, and personally, I > feel like web components can be a small part of a project, but depending on > them as a primary part of a project has a fatal flaw. They are built on > the premise that they can be self-contained and use their internal state to > function on their own. In reality, context matters entirely. My toolbar > might be in different locations, may display different items depending on > the page I'm using it on, or one what actions the user has taken > previously. To add this context back into the component every single > component has to have the overhead of building the context-awareness back > into the component. Overall, there is a lot of overhead with web > components. A large part of the appeal of Angular 1.3 was that it did a > lot of overhead for us and let us focus on the code that is more directly > related to realizing our business goals. > > Angular 2 seems like it should be a new product with a different name, > maybe Angular Components. Angular 1.x should continue as Angular. > > But back to my current decision. I can't in good conscience start a > project written in Angular 1.4 that has no forward path and will have to be > completely rewritten. Why even have 1.4 (or 1.5)? I don't like ReactJS, > although I may hold my nose and use it anyway. I really liked Angular, so > I am torn. > > Google is developing a very bad reputation of building abandonware, which > is not acceptable if you are building your business on their platform. If > Google's attention span is that of a teenager, it should quit building > platforms. It's the wrong mindset for business. It makes me wonder if > Google had more seasoned employees they would appreciate the fundamental > flaw in abandoning technology after technology. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "AngularJS" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to angular+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to angular@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/angular. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
