3 ms·

What stops you from migrating to 2.x? I'm geniunly interested. I have a fat app in 1.x myself but for new peojects I would consider Polymer instead of Angular

What stops you from migrating to 2.x? I'm geniunly interested. I have a fat app in 1.x myself but for new peojects I would consider Polymer instead of Angular 2.x

ben_jones 10y ago
Happy to answer that. First off we don't use vanilla angular 1.x, we use meteorJS + Angular-Meteor which means we're locked in to Meteor's build pipeline. Angular-Meteor supports both 1.x and 2.x, and Meteor's build pipeline has us writing angular code in ES6 that is on the cutting edge of 1.x and looks very similar to 2.x without actually being typescript. The Meteor and Angular-Meteor teams are both really great, really quick response times to issues and combined have a really great ecosystem that helps bridge the gap between traditional angular libraries and the Angular-Meteor stack. However 2.x support in Angular Meteor is slightly different then the bleeding edge of 2.x from the Angular teams. Last I checked their are a few shims and it is also incompatible with a lot of third party meteor and angular-meteor libraries. Furthermore switching to 2.x would require a decent amount of refactoring, not necessarily because we'd HAVE to refactor it but because if we did refactor we'd want to take advantage of as much of 2.x as possible which would require rewrites. Finally I don't really like Typescript. I think its advantages over ES6 are marginal for most small or medium apps. Having to refactor Es6 -> Typescript and 1.x -> 2.x seems like a lot of work to me, especially because 2.x will have the growing pains of being bleeding edge, meaning fewer stack overflow answers and a much smaller ecosystem. For a new side SPA project where I could write a custom build system via Gulp I would probably write it in 2.x, or maybe try out React. But I still wouldn't use it for a new production app because I see too much added complexity that would diminish the productivity I've already built up in 1.x. Oh and then the only effect it has on end-users is slightly faster performance. You can argue for weeks over the value of this, but for us it's fairly marginal. Our app doesn't render tons of rows or anything that is slow to begin with, so it would almost have no affect on them whatsoever.
- themihai 10y ago
  Thanks for the answer! Shortly said I feel the same. Angular 2.x would bring fairly marginal value to an existing project. Considering the amount of refactoring it's not worth it yet.
- cname 10y ago
  Since ES6 is valid TypeScript, it seems like you could move to Angular 2 without learning much about TypeScript (beyond how to run the compiler).

What stops you from migrating to 2.x? I'm geniunly interested. I have a fat app in 1.x myself but for new peojects I would consider Polymer instead of Angular 2.x

ben_jones 10y ago

Happy to answer that. First off we don't use vanilla angular 1.x, we use meteorJS + Angular-Meteor which means we're locked in to Meteor's build pipeline. Angular-Meteor supports both 1.x and 2.x, and Meteor's build pipeline has us writing angular code in ES6 that is on the cutting edge of 1.x and looks very similar to 2.x without actually being typescript. The Meteor and Angular-Meteor teams are both really great, really quick response times to issues and combined have a really great ecosystem that helps bridge the gap between traditional angular libraries and the Angular-Meteor stack. However 2.x support in Angular Meteor is slightly different then the bleeding edge of 2.x from the Angular teams. Last I checked their are a few shims and it is also incompatible with a lot of third party meteor and angular-meteor libraries. Furthermore switching to 2.x would require a decent amount of refactoring, not necessarily because we'd HAVE to refactor it but because if we did refactor we'd want to take advantage of as much of 2.x as possible which would require rewrites. Finally I don't really like Typescript. I think its advantages over ES6 are marginal for most small or medium apps. Having to refactor Es6 -> Typescript and 1.x -> 2.x seems like a lot of work to me, especially because 2.x will have the growing pains of being bleeding edge, meaning fewer stack overflow answers and a much smaller ecosystem. For a new side SPA project where I could write a custom build system via Gulp I would probably write it in 2.x, or maybe try out React. But I still wouldn't use it for a new production app because I see too much added complexity that would diminish the productivity I've already built up in 1.x. Oh and then the only effect it has on end-users is slightly faster performance. You can argue for weeks over the value of this, but for us it's fairly marginal. Our app doesn't render tons of rows or anything that is slow to begin with, so it would almost have no affect on them whatsoever.

themihai 10y ago
Thanks for the answer! Shortly said I feel the same. Angular 2.x would bring fairly marginal value to an existing project. Considering the amount of refactoring it's not worth it yet.
cname 10y ago
Since ES6 is valid TypeScript, it seems like you could move to Angular 2 without learning much about TypeScript (beyond how to run the compiler).