User tests: Successful: Unsuccessful:
Pull Request for Issue # .
Update some critical parts (eslint)
moved the webcomponents folder to build/media/webcomponents
copied the folders: media/vendor/tinyMCE/langs, media/vendor/tinyMCE/templates and media/vendor/jquery-ui to build/media/vendor/... The first 2 folders are actually code that belongs to the Joomla project. The latter is just because jquery-ui is way to outdated to even care to fetch it properly (has been marked for removal, anyways).
replaced the chalk with kleur (a highlighting script for the command line)
removed the --compilecescss and the relative file.
Refactor the compilecejs to be capable to produce inline css and also the relative files (the first one is required for the webcomponents, the latter for the custom elements)
Commands:
/* *
* To get the complete functional media folder please run
*
* npm install
*
* For dedicated tasks, please run:
* node build.js --installer === will create the error page (for unsupported PHP version)
* node build.js --update === will clean the media/vendor folder and then fetch the dependencies from source
* node build.js --compilejs === will transpile ES6 files and also uglify the ES6,ES5 files
* node build.js --compilecejs === will compile all the given CE or WC with their relative css files
* node build.js --compilecss === will compile all the scss defined files and also create a minified version of the css
*
*/
just try the commands
Status | New | ⇒ | Pending |
Category | ⇒ | JavaScript Repository |
Title |
|
Labels |
Added:
?
|
about:
Without
fromoption PostCSS could generate wrong source map and will not find Browserslist config. Set it to CSS file path or to
undefinedto prevent this warning.
That is a warning that map needs a source file, but we don't use maps (at least for CE's)
The other was a stupid mistake on search-replace.
So why are we moving from chalk to kleur? According to kleur's readme
Aside from the performance boost, `kleur` exists as a separate module because I've removed some of `ansi-colors`'s defining features, like bright color variants and symbols. It's tailor-made for my needs and experimentation.
I'm not really seeing why a module that recommends somebody else's module because it's for experimentation is something we'd want to use. I don't see the need for a small performance boost for cli highlighting in a dev tool where css and js compilation is going to take magnitudes longer than cli
Actually, I'm gonna ditch the whole coloured output from the cli, there's no reason to get more dependencies for such things
Status | Pending | ⇒ | Fixed in Code Base |
Closed_Date | 0000-00-00 00:00:00 | ⇒ | 2018-07-20 13:23:15 |
Closed_By | ⇒ | wilsonge |