So you think Meteor should close the door, make the React people and the ‘fourth segment’ happy; alienate people who love Blaze or Angular?
Instead of keeping 4 doors (Blaze, React, Angular, i-dont-care) open?
There are more React people (outside the Meteor community) right now because React is the new shiny thing. This ‘jumping to new things’ is a reality of our industry and everybody knows that nothing stays new. Soon people will start complaining that React has no separation of concerns (when writing code), that it is ugly to write HTML in your JS, that it makes life painful for web designers, … and then a new technology will emerge and React will start losing popularity. Or maybe Angular will eventually gain more traction and become more popular.
We (you) can argue that React is better than Blaze; but you would be dead wrong. No technology is better than the other. Each and every technology/solution does and will have its pros and cons. Blaze has it pros and cons. So does React. It’s a matter of choice.
Let’s replace Blaze with OSX and React with Windows (or vice versa, doesn’t matter really). If you are writing a desktop application and want as big a userbase as possible, your app must run on both OSX and Windows. You can’t say ‘I will only code for OSX’ (again, if you want as big a userbase as possible).
IMHO, if Meteor wants to be a go-to solution for developers, it has to support Blaze, React and Angular. And if some other technology emerges and becomes popular enough (although the ‘enough’ part is subjective) Meteor has to support that too. You can abandon a technology only if its popularity is not ‘enough’ anymore (yet again, if you want to be an all-encompassing).
I understand your point of view. You think React is so very popular, and that if MDG stopped trying to support every technology out there and instead focused on one, things would progress faster.
The problem is that you are seeing React like a de-facto standard. Sorry, but it’s not. It is very popular, yes; but it’s not the single most popular way of doing things. Even if that were the case, it is not a logical reason to let the others go.
Think PHP. Anybody experienced in PHP (with some other languages thrown in the mix) will tell you that it is ugly and way behind in some areas. That doesn’t change the fact that PHP is one of the predominant ways of doing things. (You can replace PHP with C#, wouldn’t matter.) Yet although PHP is much more popular and dominant (sector-wise), we are not only looking for alternatives, but also testing them and switching over if we can.
Blaze is one of the main reasons some of us switched over to Meteor. It provides a way to do things simply, easily and beautifully. I don’t care what technology outside Meteor is popular. Blaze is a beautiful and elegant technology with a very low learning curve (mind you, low learning curve does not mean useless in advanced situations).
If Meteor decided to stop supporting Blaze, and forced me into using React or Angular (or something else) that would be the day I stopped using Meteor. I would be sad, but I would leave. Something tells me there are people that think like me, loving the simplicity of doing things the Meteor way (easy yet powerful).
We did not abandon IronRouter entirely when FlowRouter came along. It’s the same (for me) with React and Blaze. Having a new friend does not (should not) mean abandoning the others.
I propose a different solution than yours. I propose we support them all, but not expect everything from MDG.
From where I’m starting, MDG can’t keep up with the community (which is normal), and it needs to create separate repositories / developer groups / anything else for each technology that Meteor uses, needs or supports. One group for Blaze, one for React, one for Angular, a subgroup for Blaze-IronRouter, another subgroup for Blaze-FlowRouter, … These groups do not have to work for MDG. They have to work for Meteor.
My two cents.