3 ms·
Well, how about using the original title - "Surge Focus on Material 2"? It seems more appropriate as nothing in the discussion included a notice on deprecating
by fridek 10y ago
Well, how about using the original title - "Surge Focus on Material 2"? It seems more appropriate as nothing in the discussion included a notice on deprecating the 1.x branch.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- dang 10y agoSince people are concerned with Material 1, we've replaced the title with what seems to be the most representative phrase from the article about Material 1. I couldn't fit in the bit about bugs in the 80 char limit. (Submitted title was "Google deprecating Angular 1.x Material library and is just closing issues and PRs", which was wrongly editorialized, since the article apparently doesn't say they're 'deprecating' the library, and 'just' is just spin. Submitters: please don't rewrite titles to put your spin on a topic, especially not to gin up controversy. If a title is misleading or linkbait, it's ok to rewrite it (see the HN guidelines), but the new title needs to be accurate and neutral, and should preferably use representative language from the article itself.)
- mst 10y agoGiven the exact words of the post, I'd've added "for Q3", since they didn't say the maintenance mode is permanent. Not sure if that helps that much though.