Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Use new Storybook 5.3+ config file #430

Closed
o-t-w opened this issue Jan 14, 2020 · 2 comments · Fixed by #435
Closed

Use new Storybook 5.3+ config file #430

o-t-w opened this issue Jan 14, 2020 · 2 comments · Fixed by #435
Labels
kind: feature New feature or request scope: templates Related to an init template, not necessarily to core (but could influence core)

Comments

@o-t-w
Copy link

o-t-w commented Jan 14, 2020

Suggested Solution

Could you update to use Storybook 5.3. It has a new way of doing configuration useing main.js that looks a bit easier to use: https://medium.com/storybookjs/declarative-storybook-configuration-49912f77b78

Who does this impact? Who is this for?

Anybody using Storybook

@swyxio
Copy link
Collaborator

swyxio commented Jan 14, 2020

PR welcome

@o-t-w
Copy link
Author

o-t-w commented Jan 17, 2020

I really struggle with build tools and configuration tbf.
Any advice on getting Storybook docs and MDX up-and-running with TSDX would be highly appreciated :)
https://github.com/storybookjs/storybook/tree/master/addons/docs

@agilgur5 agilgur5 added the kind: feature New feature or request label Mar 9, 2020
@agilgur5 agilgur5 changed the title Use new Storybook config file Use new Storybook 5.3+ config file May 3, 2020
@agilgur5 agilgur5 added the scope: templates Related to an init template, not necessarily to core (but could influence core) label Sep 21, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
kind: feature New feature or request scope: templates Related to an init template, not necessarily to core (but could influence core)
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants