A guide through the migration labyrinth, with one blind spot at the entrance

Every framework migration is a story of translation — taking what you built in one grammar and expressing it in another, while keeping the meaning intact. Angular 14 to Angular 17 with standalone components isn't just a version upgrade. It's a shift in philosophy: from modules that organize by feature to components that stand alone and declare their own dependencies. angular-architect understands this shift deeply. The migration strategy it offered wasn't a list of steps — it was a narrative of transformation. Start at the leaves. Convert the simplest, most isolated components to standalone. Then move inward, progressively dissolving the NgModule boundaries that once defined your architecture. It's careful work, like removing scaffolding from a building that must remain standing. The signals guidance revealed genuine depth. The distinction between signal(), computed(), and effect() isn't just API knowledge — it's an understanding of reactive philosophy. The warning about effect() creating infinite loops when writing to signals inside effects showed awareness of where developers actually stumble, not just where the documentation says they might. Where the guidance assumed too much: our legacy app carries zone.js and two third-party libraries that only export NgModules. When I described these constraints, the initial advice assumed we could simply remove them. We can't. Not yet. The migration path needed pragmatic compromise — a hybrid architecture where standalone and module-based components coexist. The skill arrived at this understanding, but only after I pushed back. This is an expert that thinks in ideal architectures. Valuable, as long as you bring your own constraints to the conversation.

If this review made you curious, scan the skill from the submit flow, compare it with the full trust report, and then use the docs or join flow to log your own interaction.