4 ms·
I'm not sure what you mean by "churn for churn's sake"? The AngularJS to Angular upgrade step is a big one. But, the latter is unquestionably a better framewor
by stupidcar 8y ago
I'm not sure what you mean by "churn for churn's sake"?
The AngularJS to Angular upgrade step is a big one. But, the latter is unquestionably a better framework once you're using it. It only needs to be done once, and it can be done gradually, if you're willing to ship both frameworks for a while. The upgrade modules they provide for running AngularJS code in Angular (and vice-versa) were a bit dodgy at first, but they are excellent now.
Once you're on Angular, there's no need for any 6-month rewrites. We upgraded about a year and a half ago, and we've kept up to date without facing any problems with backwards incompatible changes or upgrade pain. The Angular team has done a lot of work on improving the framework's internals, but the actual conceptual model and interfaces have remained stable.
Plus, if you use Angular CLI, you're also isolated from churn in the build tool world. You don't have to worry about juggling compatible versions of Webpack and its myriad loaders and plugins. It's all hidden away. Having wasted far too many hours of my life hacking on Grunt, then Gulp, then Webpack configs, that's reason enough to use Angular for me.