Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 5 years ago.
Improve this question
I have an open source project currently based on Angular 2. It has angular2 in it's name: generator-angular2-firebase-bootstrap (it's a yeoman generator). I am porting it to Angular 4 at the moment, but, before publishing it, I wonder how I should name it now:
Keep the name and indicate in the documentation that it's actually based on Angular 4. At least, I will not loose the history associated with this project. Also, renaming is cumbersome in npm.
Change the name to generator-angular4-firebase-bootstrap but then at next iteration of Angular, I will have the same problem again.
Change the name to generator-angular-firebase-bootstrap.
In npm, changing the name means deprecating the current project and creating a new one. I would be very interested in knowing what are the options and what are the best practices from the community.
I am facing the same problem with my open source projects. I will rename them from ng2-[...]
to
ngx-[..]
Seems like most of the community projects do that, e.g.:
- https://github.com/swimlane/ngx-datatable
- https://github.com/scttcper/ngx-toastr
Here is a SO on how to rename an npm module:
Renaming a published NPM module
I know renaming it is not an optimal solution, as you point out you will lose the history of the project.
But I think seen on a long term basis it's still the best way to go considering the Angular release schedule (2 major version releases per year): https://github.com/angular/angular/blob/master/docs/RELEASE_SCHEDULE.md#tentative-schedule-after-march-2017
Related
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 6 months ago.
Improve this question
I need a little advice before I start work.
So I have been developing a site under React for a client for 2 years now.
My client wants to duplicate this site to create 3 additional brands, the architecture, the design is the same, just the content and the logos change.
So for you is this:
1 - I duplicate in several github repos
Where
2 - I simply create several branches
Thanks
It really depends.
Option A, copy-paste your project to X other projects will make it easy to start and you can finish it in a day, BUT... every time you'll have to fix a bug you will need to do it in each repo and they'll diverge.
Option B, is to build front-end and an API.
The UI will be the same for all the projects but the API will return different data based on the client.
Option C, create a configuration file that you can modify based on the customer.
I believe that Option A will be the simplest & fastest one to get started with. You'll pay the price as you grow, but if you don't need to maintain the projects in the future I would go with it.
If you're going to maintain those projects for a long time you might want to consider refactoring the projects to a dynamic backend that returns the data based on the client.
Option C, it's a pretty good compromise between A and B.
Closed. This question needs details or clarity. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Add details and clarify the problem by editing this post.
Closed 9 months ago.
Improve this question
I'm hoping someone can point me in the right direction. I would like to add the Metaplex/candymachine function to an existing website that was originally built to work with metamask. Just trying to save myself from having to redo the website. Thanks
There's no real easy way to do this unfortunately unless you have some prior HTML/CSS/and JS knowledge.
What some people do is take the logic from the CandymachineUI which can be found here CandyMachine.ts which is a type script file and port it over to their own website. You could also attempt to remake the UI calling to these functions and data, or failing that pulling the existing Mint area out the CandymachineUI site (built on React) and attempting to slot that into your existing site. I'd recommend if you took that approach that you swap out the MUI components for div's and your own CSS to save adding MUI to your site adding some bloat (unless your site already uses MUI then you good to go).
Bare in mind you'll also need the supporting dependecies too.
There are also other community built UI's out there but you are going to run into the same issues of porting over all the js/ts to your own site.
I always say it's generally quicker to rebuild a site around an already made mint template than it is to put the mint function into an original.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 5 years ago.
Improve this question
I am looking into ways of migration a current Angular 1 project to Angular 4.
Options are ng-forward, ngUpgrade or rewrite.
I am thinking on rewriting it but with a twist.
I keep the current application
Start writing the new one parallel to it
All new NG4 rewrites, I want to use ... so bit by bit in other words.
Has anyone attempted this or know a better way?
Incrementally upgrade an AngularJS application to Angular.
One of the keys to a successful upgrade is to do it incrementally, by running the two frameworks side by side in the same application, and porting AngularJS components to Angular one by one. This makes it possible to upgrade even large and complex applications without disrupting other business, because the work can be done collaboratively and spread over a period of time. The upgrade module in Angular has been designed to make incremental upgrading seamless.
For more information, see Angular Developer Guide - Upgrading from AngularJS
The DEMO on PLNKR
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 5 years ago.
Improve this question
If I read the source of https://angular.io/ right, it looks to me that they are still using Angular 1 there i.e. 1.6 version. To me it is a hint that while the new version of Angular is very advanced there are still challenges when it comes to production deployments of sites that are publicly available?
Story of the undeveloped chicken and the egg. angular.io was there when the new angular was still in alpha. You cannot safely use an alpha version in production builds. Now that angular is released, there is no real advantage in refactoring the entire site to use the new version. Why break something that ain't broken.
If you check the material site you will see that it is build in the new angular
Angular.io using Angular 1 instead of 2 becouse they created this page during working on angular 2 when it wasn't ready yet to production.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
I am starting to integrate Angular.js into my web project.
I see on the Angular.js download page they have version 2.0.0-snapshot although I don't think version 2 has been formally released.
From the looks of the download page I think the last stable version was 1.4.7. Is that the last stable version?
And also what is recommended? Should start with version 2 or version 1.4.7 (keeping in mind a I am complete beginner).
Angular 2 is currently in Developer Preview. Angular 1.X is recommended for production applications.
That said. It's pretty important to remember that Angular 2 is basically a completely different framework with little-to-no backwards compatibility. When we all do switch (and we will someday), we'll have to start with a fresh plugin community, or wait until developers choose to update their modules to include an Angular 2 version.
Our goal with Angular 2 is to make the best possible set of tools for building web apps not constrained by maintaining backwards compatibility with existing APIs. - Angular Blog
I think the time to migrate will be around 6 months after a production release of Angular 2. That will give the developer community time to catch up and give the framework time to mature in the real world.