Agree with you , on your view point of Opensource. The same situation will 
arise , even if I decide to go with BackBone +RequireJS + JQuery , so as to 
mimic key Angular capability . So I am making a risky decision here and 
deciding to go ahead with Angular JS 1.3 .. So as to handle similar 
situations , I am thinking of making presentation layer , very thin and 
purely presentation only . So that we can afford to do refresh , after 3 
years . 

.. Not sure whether I will lose my job with this decision .. :-)

On Wednesday, 29 October 2014 22:58:24 UTC+5:30, Corey wrote:
>
> I have to admit, I'm more than a little discouraged by how invasive 2.0 
> will be.  There is (currently) no upgrade path nor backward compatibility 
> with 1.x.
>  
> My group (and it's a large one) has a significant investment in building 
> an expertise in 1.x that we can't transfer over at all.  In an enterprise 
> setting, we need a little more than a 3-year lifecycle of our apps.  Jan 
> Carlo called it correctly - any support or value add for 1.x will dwindle - 
> starting now.  Courses will not be updated, plug-ins 
> development/enhancements will have stopped.  And this availability will 
> twindle FAR faster than the lifecycle of our 1.x apps are expected to have.
>  
> IMHO, this brings out the worst aspect of Open Source projects.  Sure 
> there are those out there who jump on the band wagon and are anamoured with 
> the next shiny bauble, but for a lot of us who architect multi-year 
> projects, this is a kick in the teeth.  How are we to go back to our 
> project sponsors in 2 years because they want enhancements and it will cost 
> 4x effort because it's based on an obsolete platform?
>  
> Not to be (too) critical, but for a framework that has so revolutionized 
> web development, I feel that the ball has been dropped somewhere by 
> deviating so far from the rosy path that we've all been led.  It tells me 
> that they had so little confidence in their initial design (or perhaps they 
> architected themselves into a corner) that they felt they had to throw it 
> away so drastically.
>  
> Even more disturbing is that a precident has been set if things can change 
> so drastically, so invasively, what's to prevent it from happen again?  And 
> not just about Angular.  
>  
> This makes Solution Architects lose sleep at night.
>  
> Thanks for letting me rant.
>  
>

-- 
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 [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/angular.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to