When comparing Component vs Jam, the Slant community recommends Jam for most people. In the question“What are the best open source front-end package managers?” Jam is ranked 8th while Component is ranked 10th. The most important reason people chose Jam is:
A central repository provides more guarantees about the availability of the package. With requiring directly from repository urls, the entire project could potentially be taken down on a whim.
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pros
Pro Vertically integrated with the build process
Component handles more than just package management; it also deals with the build process and bundling, so you don't have to find and manage a separate solution. This lets you get up and running faster with less to worry about.
Pro Also manages non javascript components
Components can be html snippets or css in addition to Javascript, and are treated as first class objects by being converted into Javascript modules that load styles and markup as strings.
Pro Components are more structured and thus have more inter-compatibility
Components can be javascript, style and markup, they are bundled in a way that makes it possible to load in entire UI chunks. This means less flexibility, but the components that are available are easier to work with.
Pro Designed with ES6 modules and Web Components in mind
Component is designed as a current-day solution for the currently proposed ES6 modules and Web Components, making it more in-line with the direction the web is going in the future.
Pro Encourages simpler and smaller components
Components are encouraged by convention to be small and single-use, meaning that the packages in the community's ecosystem are easier to use and combine together. More complex components use dependency resolution to compose smaller components so that components stay limited in scope.
Pro Easy dependency management
Component provides you with a flat dependency tree. This results in easy dependency management. A flat dependency tree is important for file size optimization, so you don't end up loading multiple copies of the same library, or deeply nested dependencies that bloat up.
Pro Has a central package repository
A central repository provides more guarantees about the availability of the package. With requiring directly from repository urls, the entire project could potentially be taken down on a whim.
Pro Community is focused on client side javascript
Because Jam only manages Javascript and only works on the client side, you have the assurance that any packages listed are AMD compatible for asynchronous loading.
Pro Architecture independent
Jam's only a front-end package manager, the rest of your server can be on a different architecture or framework. No matter what the architecture, Jam will integrate easily with it.
Pro Provides the best AMD compatibility allowing for better asynchronous loading
Jam requires AMD (Asynchronous Module Definition), which means faster package loading, as it can be done asynchronously.
Cons
Con No longer maintained
Component is no longer being developed/maintained, so there will be no new features or bug fixes.
Con Cannot add modules that are not on Github
While using Github as a backend database for Component makes things a lot easier, as there's no need to add other authorization credentials to use modules, it means that modules that aren't on Github cannot be added.
Con Forced AMD compatibility means fewer libraries
AMD is currently not as popular as CommonJS modules, which means if a library isn't supported, you'll have to deal with it yourself.