Thomas, You can just add aurelia to the head and be done and started just like Angular(1) albeit your productivity will be slow.
Your issues sound to me like saying I can just open Notepad and start coding my C# project. Why would I install Visual Studio? Why would you install Nuget or MSBuild or System.Web.Optimization libraries to bundle JS files? You installed them all as part of Visual Studio, that's the only difference. - node.js is like .Net framework (that comes these days as part of Windows) - gulp is msbuild - nuget is npm and bower - System.Web.Optimization is like jspm + nuget - Yeoman - I have no idea, I haven't installed or used that - systemjs is not required, it's a nice to have to make things easier to load and do the bundling/dependency resolving to avoid you to "just add another .js file to the head". You can keep doing that and not need systemjs. Kind of the .Net BundleCollection on steroids. - Babel - don't know, didn't use it. - TypeScript - it's an awesome option that compiles down to JS directly without Babel. You really want to use this unless to avoid writing JS. Typescript looks and feels like C# instead of JS. Again, it's optional but heck, I hate JS You can get prepared startup projects for VisualStudio with none of the above odd tools: https://github.com/cmichaelgraham/aurelia-typescript/tree/master/skel-nav-require-vs-ts Clean, .Net solution with couple of JS files. Side note> Angular1 requires a massive amount of work to get anything working and get a project more than a simple demo of the ground. Angular2 has a hard to read syntax. How am I supposed to make the difference between (click) and [click] and {click} and what each does? Look, I totally hate JS and I only started to use these tools myself last week, I also found the confusing at times and all have funny names and can't figure out why there are configurations for requirejs, amd, system, systemjs and 4 other loader libraries or what are the differences between them but heck, after few days of work I got something cool working, and a great UI that I tried to build before in Angular and I hated myself every day I had to learn some random new awkward behaviour, directive, service, provider, filter ... I found Aurelia to rock in design and simplicity compared to Angular and found it fast to learn and apply. Just my 2 cents. On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 2:24 PM, Thomas Koster <tkos...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 9 September 2015 at 13:18, Corneliu I. Tusnea > <corne...@acorns.com.au> wrote: > > Compared to Augular2 Aurelia simply rocks and it's so dead easy to > > setup. > > Aurelia looks interesting, but a quick scan through "Getting > Started" [1] reveals that you need the following to, ah, get started: > > - node.js for the entire toolchain, > - Gulp to build, > - jspm or bower for front end package management, > - Yeoman for scaffolding, > - systemjs for client-side DI, > - Babel, CoffeeScript or TypeScript for "compiling" to browser- > compatible ES5/JavaScript. > > I have none of these things installed, yet I can start a new AngularJS > project today by simply adding angular.js to my html head. > > Do you mean something else by "dead easy to setup"? All this sounds > exactly like the JS ecosystem hell that Greg K meant. > > [1] http://aurelia.io/get-started.html > > -- > Thomas Koster >
