Agreed. I should have made my previous comment more clear: Ben's changes are a huge step in the right direction.
Is there a strong argument against using UMD? The drawbacks of UMD feel a lot smaller than the drawbacks of publishing two separate versions of Angular. --Andrew On Thursday, January 15, 2015 at 12:07:30 PM UTC-5, Paul Everitt wrote: > > > > On Thursday, January 15, 2015 at 10:51:13 AM UTC-5, Marcus Nielsen wrote: >> >> That's how I use it right now. >> Angular becomes the boilerplate code and my controller/factories become >> normal functions with DI that are exported via CommonJS. >> > > That's the point I have arrived at also (thanks to inspiration from Ben > and others.) I basically do NodeJS development, no Angular. The Angular > parts are registered in the index.js for each subcomponents. > > But testing that index.js is a jump back into shims, bundles, Karma as a > DOM, etc. I *could* avoid that with Ben's forked angular-node (and forked > mocks) but then my app is tied to his releases. > > It feels like Ben is close to a small step that will radically change the > equation for people developing large, componentized Angular applications. > -- 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.
