feat(schematics): replace href with routerLink

[santoshyadavdev]

I use this schematic very often and always replace href with routerLink, it will be better if we make routerLink default.

[devversion]

I think we cannot do that as the schematic does not necessarily require @angular/router to be installed and set up.

[santoshyadavdev]

But the question is are we going to use href, the schematic will not throw an exception even if we make this change. And I replace it with routerLink every time

[devversion]

I'm not sure. My thinking is that the schematic intends to provide a basic foundation for a navigation and that it's not obvious whether the Angular router is used or not. Adding routerLink is specific to the Angular router (even if it won't cause any type check error), and this might not be desired in all situations.

I definitely see the use-case for this though. We could have this as a prompt in the schematic, but then we probably should also ensure that @angular/router is installed, and also add RouterModule. Not sure if that is in scope for the schematic.

[santoshyadavdev]

We can have routerLink default and move to href based on input, i don't have stats, but i am sure most of the time, developers will use routerLink.

[devversion]

I definitely agree that routerLink is commonly used for navigation, but my point is that routerLink does not work if @angular/router and the RouterModule are not set up.

It might not fail having a routerLink attribute, but the href is not set if the router module is not set up. Schematics should be helpful for beginners too, and leaving the code incomplete w/ needed additional manual action from users seems wrong.

The anchors will actually not be clickable if the module is not set up. So ideally, we'd ensure @angular/router is set up, and setup the RouterModule if needed.

[crisbeto]

I agree with @devversion that we can't assume that people will be using the router. If you go through ng new, you have to explicitly select that you want the router to be included.

[jelbourn]

I agree with @devversion and @crisbeto. I think this is a tiny enough inconvenience that we don't want to change it right now.

[Splaktar]

I think that it's out of scope for this schematic to add the RouterModule. However, I think that it would be reasonable to add an opt-in argument for --routerEnabled or something similar to enable using routerLink here.

[santoshyadavdev]

Thank @Splaktar, @jelbourn can you reopen the PR, please?

[Splaktar]

@santoshyadav198613 you should be able to re-open it, but I suggest that you wait until you push up changes to make this optional.

[santoshyadavdev]

@santoshyadav198613 you should be able to re-open it, but I suggest that you wait until you push up changes to make this optional.

Thanks @Splaktar will do that.

[santoshyadavdev]

Hi @Splaktar I am not able to change the status of PR, can you open this again. I pushed some changes which I need to verify.

[Splaktar]

@santoshyadav198613 GitHub is complaining that the branch was force pushed or recreated, so it wants you to open a new PR. Sorry for the inconvenience.

[santoshyadavdev]

Sure will do that.

[angular-automatic-lock-bot]

This issue has been automatically locked due to inactivity.
Please file a new issue if you are encountering a similar or related problem.

Read more about our automatic conversation locking policy.

_{This action has been performed automatically by a bot.}