Where communities thrive


  • Join over 1.5M+ people
  • Join over 100K+ communities
  • Free without limits
  • Create your own community
People
Activity
  • 06:53
    LetsZiggy closed #198
  • 06:53
    LetsZiggy commented #198
  • Jun 27 10:11
    hiaux0 commented #198
  • Jun 27 10:10
    hiaux0 commented #198
  • Jun 25 22:42
    LetsZiggy edited #198
  • Jun 25 15:54
    LetsZiggy edited #198
  • Jun 25 15:48
    LetsZiggy opened #198
  • Jun 20 01:37
    bigopon commented #182
  • Jun 16 21:41

    bigopon on 4.0.3

    (compare)

  • Jun 16 18:33
    josundt commented #341
  • Jun 15 22:09
    bigopon commented #341
  • Jun 15 22:07

    bigopon on master

    chore(release): prepare release… (compare)

  • Jun 15 17:10
    josundt commented #341
  • Jun 15 17:10
    josundt commented #341
  • Jun 15 17:09
    josundt commented #341
  • Jun 15 17:07
    josundt commented #341
  • Jun 15 17:01
    josundt commented #341
  • Jun 15 17:01
    josundt commented #341
  • Jun 15 17:01
    josundt commented #341
  • Jun 15 11:13
    bigopon commented #341
Tomas Billborn
@tomasbillborn
Is there no support for {less} with easy-webpack?
Roland Quast
@rquast
@MaximBalaganskiy I don't have a problem with jquery and webpack.. just semantic - Semantic-Org/Semantic-UI#3533
I'd kill for a nice ui that just works.
José A. Sachs
@jhewt
MDL works just fine for me
or Polymer
Roland Quast
@rquast
I used mdl before semantic
José A. Sachs
@jhewt
ah
Roland Quast
@rquast
mdl didn't have enough for what I needed
semantic has all the features, but not webpack friendly
José A. Sachs
@jhewt
Indeed, "lite"
Dwayne Charrington
@Vheissu
@tomasbillborn I created a Sass one which hasn't been released yet, planning on getting to a Stylus and Less one tonight probably.
Also wanting to add in support for Autoprefixer as well.
Tomas Billborn
@tomasbillborn
Thats great, I would actually rather just go webpack as it is, but documentation on how to actually implement it feel like it is minimal atm
Dwayne Charrington
@Vheissu
That's the great thing about what @niieani started with Easy Webpack, lots of configurations for Webpack projects without needing to pull your hair out. Webpack has quite a steep learning curve when you start getting knee-deep into it.
Roland Quast
@rquast
that new skeleton looks pretty good
Tomas Billborn
@tomasbillborn
Well I had no problem before this release, I think some parts of it seem great, but I rather have a "normal" implementation of webpack
Roland Quast
@rquast
easy webpack a great idea
Tomas Billborn
@tomasbillborn
If I would need to implement a { less } loader its there, I dont wanna have to hack into the setup and have "some easy-webpack" and some regular webpack
Dwayne Charrington
@Vheissu
You can define your own loaders inside of the config without using Easy Webpack as well.
Until my copy files plugin contribution is released I have this:
      (function() {
        return {
          plugins: [
            new CopyWebpackPlugin([{
              from: 'src/assets/images',
              to: 'images'
            }])
          ]
        }
      })()
Tomas Billborn
@tomasbillborn
Well then we are back to minimal documenation and me sitting and reading your repo code : )
Roland Quast
@rquast
I don't think anything is easy when it comes to build scripts... webpack included
Dwayne Charrington
@Vheissu
This is my Sass one (still not perfect though, CSS is still inlined):
      (function () {
        const extractCss = { filename: '[name].css', allChunks: false, sourceMap: false };
        const extractCSSinstance = extractCss ? new ExtractTextPlugin(extractCss.filename || '[name].css', extractCss) : null;

        let config = {
          module: {
            loaders: get(this, 'module.loaders', []).concat([{
              test: /\.scss$/i,
              loaders: extractCss ? extractCSSinstance.extract('style', ['css', 'postcss', 'sass']) : ['style', 'css', 'postcss', 'sass']
            }])
          }
        };

        return config;
      })(),
Roland Quast
@rquast
but that easy webpack should be good at least for a template of how things are done
and you can fork if you want to keep track of changes
Tomas Billborn
@tomasbillborn
I appreciate your help and what you are doing, but I am having a hardtime to see why I need to reinvent the wheel, there is a loader for less and webpack already
Dwayne Charrington
@Vheissu
Easy Webpack doesn't change anything, the syntax for defining loaders and whatnot remains the same. You just use it within the confines of the plugin now.
Tomas Billborn
@tomasbillborn
With this i have to write an extra config for each loader
Dwayne Charrington
@Vheissu
The above is no different than how you normally define a loader. The one difference being you register it with the generateConfig function. The configs are just wrapped in functions now.
Roland Quast
@rquast
I dunno.. easy-webpack makes a lot of sense to me. It's not reinventing the wheel if it consolidates config that can normally be spread across a webpack config file.
maybe it's just inappropriately named.. maybe should be something like "cleanly-organised-webpack".
Tomas Billborn
@tomasbillborn
Before I had simply to define the less loader in the module.loader for it to work now I have to define it through a function or a new file exporting a module. Not saying easy-webpack is bad because I havent evaluated it enough, simply I think it hads complexity
adds*
Hopefully I am proven wrong, atm it just not super clear how to do things that before could be implemented pretty easy
Roland Quast
@rquast
to me it looks similar to what you get in configuration files for apache etc... all broken up into configuration parts
and I think in the long run, aurelia cli should generate the webpack config and give you the choice of a simple config or an easy-webpack layout
(as one of the options, other than the aurelia cli loader)
kevmeister68
@kevmeister68
Why do we need so many loaders - in what area do they tend to differ (coming from someone with little knowledge in this area -- yet)?
Randy Vroegop
@vroegop
I have a question about the fetch client and cookies; using the following code my cookies are not set in the request:
    document.cookie = "username=John Doe";

    this.http.fetch('http://localhost:9100/login', {
      method: 'post',
      body: json({username: "test", password: "pass1"})
    })
Roland Quast
@rquast
@kevmeister68 because nothing is perfect (yet)
José A. Sachs
@jhewt
@rjpvroegop use config.useStandardConfiguration()
Randy Vroegop
@vroegop
@jhewt where would one do that? In main.js I have aurelia.use.standardConfiguration(), did you mean that?
José A. Sachs
@jhewt
@rjpvroegop In your constructor, where you are injected the fetch library
constructor(http, ea) {
    http.configure(config => {
        config
            .useStandardConfiguration();
    })
    this.http = http;
}
sorry about that "ea", that's the EventAggregator I'm using in my services
is too long to write it over and over :D
Randy Vroegop
@vroegop
Thank you trying that now :)
José A. Sachs
@jhewt
@rjpvroegop Check out the HUB docs for fetch, may help a lot http://aurelia.io/hub.html#/doc/article/aurelia/fetch-client/latest/http-services/2
Gregory Bouteiller
@gbouteiller
Hello, has someone tried to use rollup to bundle aurelia code?
Randy Vroegop
@vroegop
@jhewt Setting the configuration did not work on its own, I've used the credentials: 'include' in my header and allow that in my access header on the API. Thank you anyways for poining in a direction :D
Bazyli Brzóska
@niieani
@Vheissu @tomasbillborn @rquast actually generateConfig of easy-webpack can take in either a function or a simple object. For simple configs an object is enough, whether you want to manually override some elements or append to certain arrays (e.g. the plugin array). The default behavior is to deep merge objects, append values to arrays and in all other cases overwrite the old values. The function approach allows for more fine grained changes like prepending arrays, or using previously generated config as input for the generated output. Last config is available as this inside the function.