[WIP] Sage 9 #1590
[WIP] Sage 9 #1590
Conversation
|
|
|
I guess even gulp could be dropped in favor of something like: browser-sync-webpack-plugin |
Why? |
|
@rob006 with webpack you can use npm, bower, and or manually vendored scripts together with no problems. However, going forward, we are going to recommend using npm. The packages in npm's registry are higher-quality and usually built with UMD/module loading in mind. As far as community sentiment: a lot of the react community doesn't even bother to publish to bower. Angular 2 dropped support for bower as well. |
|
@austinpray I'm just curious what is wrong with bower so people want use package manager designed for JS for all frontend dependencies (which may not contain any JS content, for example css frameworks or font sets). And I always get some irrational arguments like "bower's tree is flat" or "bower is unreliable because depend on GitHub, and GitHub can be DDoSed". So Sage drop bower because some specific issue, or just because npm is cooler?
No, it doesn't, it just not support all features of bower. It even use bower: |
|
There have been a lot more times recently when a package I really wanted to use just wasn't available on bower, and I had to add it manually to my overrides files instead of just installing it. Its not that you can't keep using bower, but I'd say that most things you'd install that have a bower.json file will also have a package.json file. |
|
@rob006, I think you might have missed apray's opening sentence. Here it is again.
So feel free to keep using Bower if that's what you're into. But we will most likely be pulling Sage 9 dependencies from npm. |
|
@QWp6t I have not missed that, I just ask what is the reason of dropping bower and what is npm advantage. I'm not a bower fanboy, if there is something wrong with bower I'd like to know that. If it's only personal preferences, just say it, I'm fine with it. |
|
@rob006 a 100% logical reason to drop bower is that it is not needed. For the purposes of sage as it appears out of the box: npm and bower have overlapping features. We simply do not require 3 package managers. If you personally enjoy bower or your project calls for bower, it will still be just as easy to use. If not easier than before. |
|
@ptrckvzn has been working on webpack with sage 9 😍 more info: https://discourse.roots.io/t/sage-9-webpack/6066 |
Note: We specify CXX env because v8 requires a C++11 compiler
Exclusion of PSR-2 rule for BraceOnSameLine is not enough. We need to specifically force this rule.
Remove path.extname() check to fix build:production task. Currently path.extname() is being supplied an object when it expects a string, resulting in a fatal error during production builds. Removal is the cleanest solution as it's an unnecessary check, assets[name] will always be an object.
Wrapper will now pass through $template if locate_template() turns up zero results.
Rework template wrapper, bring back template_part()
* Isolate scope of included files * Load composer dependencies before loading Sage procedural code Note that scope isolation was originally proposed by @al-the-x in 2014, and we rejected it at the time. Our theory at the time was that shared scope might be expected by WordPress developers. But since then we've done quite a number of things that are atypical of WordPress development, including our use of namespaces, which in itself is a form of scope isolation.
Remove path.extname() check
… a base As part of #1619
added link to podcast to readme moved contributing.md to .github
1. Update dependencies - Add font-awesome as dependency - Switch to Bootstrap 4 dev branch - Remove eslint airbnb style (we're not using it) 2. Imported images and fonts should go into dist/images and dist/fonts, respectively 3. Only lint our own code, not external code (fixes #1633)
Load tether
#1696) * Set dynamically aboslute public path on 'npm run watch'; fix http/https hardcoded in watch.js * WEBPACK_PUBLIC_PATH fix
work in progress, no ETA for release at this time
goals