You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
There are scenarios where using the piral-cli tools is unnecessary cumbersome. If a framework already comes with a pre-defined build process (and capabilities) then using Piral with it may be problematic. After all - you now have two conflicting tools. In many cases that conflict is resolved by a common bundler (mostly Webpack), but in some cases this is difficult (up to "impossible").
A suitable solution would be to have a "task runner" as bundler, which would just call a task from the package.json:
Right now the exact options for the pilet:debug and pilet:build sections are unclear. Maybe they are the same after all - such that debug does not need to create another dev server. Instead, in debug a file system watcher is monitoring the same output.
Nevertheless, this command wrapper would expect some kind of file(s) there - which would then be converted / called to have the right format (in case of a pilet).
Background
Users of Angular could then just stay on the Angular CLI and use that. For instance, a pilet would just be an Angular library, which could be built and watched with Angular. The piral-cli would then do the rest. The same applies to other frameworks (most notably things like Ember or Blazor) where the tooling is quite opaque and not easy to integrate.
Discussion
Is this a useful one? What options would need to be respected for this to be good? Where does this "bundler" end and where does the custom tooling start? My personal feeling is that the task running bundler ends at setting some ENV variables (e.g., shared deps) which may then be used by the custom tooling. The bundler then would only apply certain things such as the right pilet envelope / wrapper.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
New Feature Proposal
For more information, see the
CONTRIBUTING
guide.Description
There are scenarios where using the
piral-cli
tools is unnecessary cumbersome. If a framework already comes with a pre-defined build process (and capabilities) then using Piral with it may be problematic. After all - you now have two conflicting tools. In many cases that conflict is resolved by a common bundler (mostly Webpack), but in some cases this is difficult (up to "impossible").A suitable solution would be to have a "task runner" as bundler, which would just call a task from the package.json:
Right now the exact options for the
pilet:debug
andpilet:build
sections are unclear. Maybe they are the same after all - such that debug does not need to create another dev server. Instead, in debug a file system watcher is monitoring the same output.Nevertheless, this command wrapper would expect some kind of file(s) there - which would then be converted / called to have the right format (in case of a pilet).
Background
Users of Angular could then just stay on the Angular CLI and use that. For instance, a pilet would just be an Angular library, which could be built and watched with Angular. The
piral-cli
would then do the rest. The same applies to other frameworks (most notably things like Ember or Blazor) where the tooling is quite opaque and not easy to integrate.Discussion
Is this a useful one? What options would need to be respected for this to be good? Where does this "bundler" end and where does the custom tooling start? My personal feeling is that the task running bundler ends at setting some ENV variables (e.g., shared deps) which may then be used by the custom tooling. The bundler then would only apply certain things such as the right pilet envelope / wrapper.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: