The churn between angular versions, stemming from the limitations and inconsistencies of two way data bindings and others, are what I mean by «shaky grounds».

Yes there is value in being opinionated, but it is less risky to decorrelate the opinion from the foundation. There are opinionated frameworks built on top of react and it is very nice like this. But react itself should not be opinionated.

There is so little churn between angular versions. Angular 1-2 was a big change and they should have renamed the framework. But you have to understand how angular 1 came into existence. It wasn’t planned to be used by everyone, it was just solving some problems experienced by a couple devs and it spread like wild fire.

The team that eventually took it over and grew around it recognized it had some problems scaling and being used for large applications. They knew they couldn’t just change angular 1 to be what it needs to be, so they made a big switch. They put in patterns that benefit large apps, typescript, observables, the choice of two way binding or one way binding, better DI system.

Everyone says react isn’t opinionated, and for developing an enterprise app that just sounds like a nightmare.

I'm not sure what churn you are talking about, unless you mean the Angular 1 - Angular 2+ split?

ng update is ridiculously easy, and the automatic code rewriting is generally sensible and easy to follow. When there are breaking changes, Angular takes care of the modifications for you. Generally I've felt like those changes resulted in a better expressed codebase (eg RxJS syntax improved massively from 5 to 6, lazy loaded routes are expressed with arrow functions now, etc).

I assumed the React community was also migrating versions with codemods, but maybe React does not introduce any breaking changes?