There are some questionable Clojure libraries, but Reagent is fantastic. Much nicer and simpler than React. For years it's been completely hegemonic in the ClojureScript space and it's definitely not going anywhere.
I've done React+Redux and it was a much worse experience than Reagent, which deliberately builds on Clojure's native immutability-friendly state management solution (atoms) and is based entirely around functions.
What did you find painful about Reagent? I used the first version of Om for many years, which by now is definitely old and outdated, but it still was much more enjoyable and productive than directly using ReactJS. Reagent is a small, simple library that makes interacting with React quite straightforward as well, so I'm curious your pain points.
The lazy bastard that I am, I already knew ReactJS. ClojureScript's stack traces suck. I just didn't want to have to implement stuff in ClojureScript when I could write it in a language I was more familiar with. ReAgent/ClojureScript just seemed hacky. I don't remember specifics as it was almost 2 years ago.
I have noticed that our developers coming from javascript pretty much exclusively feel that way (and tend to write sharper UIs.) The ones who come from the JVM and feel more emboldened to write more frontend code thanks to reagent write UIs that don't satisfy product requirements, but are very happy with reagent.
Not that devs coming from the JVM can't contribute! But there is some eyerolling from the devs coming from javascript when the primarily backend devs throw together a too-simple UI and wonder why everybody doesn't use reagent exclusively.
Clojure itself is decent. But as you mention-- "n practice everyone expects you to use poorly-maintained clojure-ish libraries to paper over the java/javascript bits, which get out of date quickly.'
That is indeed the problem I saw.