Added jsHint to enforce coding standards.

MAN I just don't know.  I really don't wanna chain everything together, but using the full module every time is just so redundant.

NNNNNNNGGGGGGGokay I think I can get on board with the chaining in this one instance.  To be more specific here, what I don't like the most is the lines that start with .something.  The . has always seemed to me like it needs to be attached to the thing it's actually chaining to, otherwise it's hard for me to discern context from the code I'm looking at.  So whenever I do things like this I'll do:

    someThing( function ()
    {
        // whatever

    } ).chainedThing( function ()
    {
        // etc

What I'd really not want to do is a whole file of controllers chained in this way, since if you wanted to space them apart a bit or write comments in between them, you'd have to do so before the ending parenthesis of the previous item, and that's just super gross.  This particular syntax only really makes sense in the case of callbacks or very tightly-related things.  Error and success, etc.  A file full of controllers sure they're related, but not so much that chaining makes a lot of sense to me semantically.

SO, I think what I'm okay with is sticking to what I described above for most cases, but in architectural situations like this where you're defining a series of controllers or directives, and your .whatevers are all on at char 0, we can do the chaining like you've proposed.  They still READ like a series of independent items, which is the most important thing to me, but they're chaining and not polluting the global namespace.

TLDR: ok you win