feat: add generate project + project improvements #200
Conversation
🦋 Changeset detectedLatest commit: 1bf14ee The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump. This PR includes changesets to release 1 package
Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are. Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR |
|
Woah - hold that 🐴 While I really appreciate your enthusiasm, I'd love for your contributions to:
You're making a lot of suggested changes here that I'm not comfortable with and I'd hate for good suggestions to be held back because of some disagreement on what tool to use for linting (as an example). |
| @@ -1,21 +0,0 @@ | |||
| { | |||
| "name": "@react-native-node-api/ferric-example", | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't understand the need to remove this in its entirety? While I do agree having a command to generate a project scaffolding, this package serves a purpose as a point of reference in itself.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I was going to try and replace that with tests.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If the cli are generating the project, then that's the point of reference.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
that's the point of reference.
It's hard to share a link to something which comes out of a CLI.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Link would be the CLI itself with the README updated.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think that link is a good representation of what a Ferric package looks like, it's not something I can easily share and reference.
You could move the entire example package into a markdown file, but then again 🤷 would that be any better?
To be clear, I think it makes sense to have a command to generate (I would probably call it init) a Ferric package and have that be whatever is in the ferric-example package, but I don't think we should delete the package from the repo. Thinking more about it, it could actually serve as a fixture for a test too 🤔
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It could, but only after being generated through the testing.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I meant mostly as to keep the whole process cleaner. Be with scaffolding or lint replacing.
| @@ -0,0 +1,38 @@ | |||
| { | |||
| "$schema": "https://biomejs.dev/schemas/2.1.2/schema.json", | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Iff we'd switch linter, it would have to be in a completely separate PR without any added features, and we'd have to bike-shed that for a while on Discord first.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Any reason why?
Because even though Biome is newer, it has already found many lint issues that eslint didnt and fixed them or provided suggestions to the ones it didnt. Project is cleaner with it.
It's just a tool that is and can do more than eslint was doing, not sure why there would be fuss in a project in a migration to it. But I understand it's your company project.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Any reason why?
I added a few comments here or there, but I won't be able to give a thorough review if your actual changes are interleaved with a ton of changes from replacing the linter.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe it's better to close the PR then?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't want to discourage you by blatantly closing the PR - I'll let you decide its faith.
I would love to discuss and merge many of the improvements, if we're able to get them reviewed one-by-one 👍
2 participants
generatecommand to generate scaffold project. Replacing ferric-example.pathas arg to build project.--releaseflag.Cargo.tomloptmizations for size.teststo ferric-cli, to build and generate commands.verboseflag to also log commands.eslintsince the project lacksformatterandsort organizer,biomeis faster and has all three.