These are chat archives for jescalan/roots

3rd
Feb 2015
Chad Campbell
@ccampb13
Feb 03 2015 16:08
having some issues hosting. On S3, it doesn't want to recognize clean_url's and on Netlify it works but doesn't throw the error_page as it should. Both work as they should locally. Anyone faced either of these issues when promoting to these platforms?
Jeff Escalante
@jescalan
Feb 03 2015 18:08
Hi @ccampb13! Yeah so locally, roots uses charge to serve the site
if you need to replicate that exact behavior on a different host you have to get creative, or set up charge to run your site
We have a roots heroku buildpack that uses charge, you can use it on a VPS
netlify has the options you need, you just need to implement them slightly differently, since netlify has their own config
You can find info on how to configure rewrites and such through netlify here: https://docs.netlify.com/redirects/
This is probably what I would suggest
Sorry @ccampb13 for netlify, you can just put a 404.html file at the root and it will display that if there's a not found error
Shane Keulen
@SeeThruHead
Feb 03 2015 18:12
hi, haven't had a chance to actually use roots yet but i've been thinking about it for a future project
is there any support for stylus-linting?
Jeff Escalante
@jescalan
Feb 03 2015 18:13
Not at the moment @SeeThruHead. Is there a stylus linting library that you typically use?
We don't have a ton of linting support in roots overall, because none of the core people use it often on projects. But would be happy to add some in if people are interested.
It should be quite easy to make an extension that does this for you
Shane Keulen
@SeeThruHead
Feb 03 2015 18:14
no i was just looking into the idea actually, figured it would be useful, i guess it's more along the lines how accessible are the compilation routines
Jeff Escalante
@jescalan
Feb 03 2015 18:15
you have direct access to compiler options
through app.coffee
Shane Keulen
@SeeThruHead
Feb 03 2015 18:15
i'm used to gulp and being able to just stick something in the stream pipeline
Jeff Escalante
@jescalan
Feb 03 2015 18:16
Sure. For roots, the equivalent is typically extensions
Many parts are even more convenient though
changing compiler options is much eaiser
Adding a new compiled language you can do by just installing the node module and using that extension on the file
Shane Keulen
@SeeThruHead
Feb 03 2015 18:17
ok i will look into writing extensions then when i get a chance
Jeff Escalante
@jescalan
Feb 03 2015 18:17
Roots is very different from gulp, but once you get used to it, it's a smoother flow for static sites
Shane Keulen
@SeeThruHead
Feb 03 2015 18:18
seems like it has most of what i was trying to do with gulp baked in
Jeff Escalante
@jescalan
Feb 03 2015 18:18
That's the goal
Shane Keulen
@SeeThruHead
Feb 03 2015 18:18
which is nice, gulp has the benefit of being dead easy to customize
Jeff Escalante
@jescalan
Feb 03 2015 18:18
Right. Roots is a little harder to customize, but a lot easier to use and maintain for the majority of use cases
Shane Keulen
@SeeThruHead
Feb 03 2015 18:18
i will delve into creating roots extensions though
properly written extensions should be able to provide any functionality available from gulp yeah?
Jeff Escalante
@jescalan
Feb 03 2015 18:19
We also very tightly curate roots extensions so that roots users are confident they can trust them
Theoretically yes
Shane Keulen
@SeeThruHead
Feb 03 2015 18:20
ok, that's good, making extensions would be fine i was just worried i might have to go hacking away at roots itself to get things working
Jeff Escalante
@jescalan
Feb 03 2015 18:21
Gulp doesn't actually do anything at it's core though, it just moves files from one place to another. Roots does a lot at it's core. It's made specifically for building static sites. So there are going to be a wider diversity of gulp plugins and use cases, but it will also be more of a pain to use because you need to manually wire everything together and be sure that you can trust the modules etc
But yeah you shouldn't have to touch roots core in all likelihood
Shane Keulen
@SeeThruHead
Feb 03 2015 18:22
alright that's neat, thanks for making this
Jeff Escalante
@jescalan
Feb 03 2015 18:22
If you are thinking about working on an extension feel free to ask here about it, we are pretty receptive and can help out
Youre welcome @SeeThruHead! Looking forward to seeing what you make
Shane Keulen
@SeeThruHead
Feb 03 2015 18:23
i'm particularly interested in creating my new blog with the hybrid thing you have going on
Jeff Escalante
@jescalan
Feb 03 2015 18:23
Yeah, I'm working on a blog template based off the hybrid concept this week
Shane Keulen
@SeeThruHead
Feb 03 2015 18:23
but i want to create a simple markdown editor for the front end using backbone
Jeff Escalante
@jescalan
Feb 03 2015 18:23
I'll let you know when it's out. Should be happening today or tomorrow
Shane Keulen
@SeeThruHead
Feb 03 2015 18:24
as an educational thing
Jeff Escalante
@jescalan
Feb 03 2015 18:24
We also are dropping a template for backbone/marionette soon :)
Shane Keulen
@SeeThruHead
Feb 03 2015 18:24
oh boy
don't want things to get too batteries included otherwise i'll never learn anything
Jeff Escalante
@jescalan
Feb 03 2015 18:25
Oh no the templates are just covering the bases. Like loading up the right extensions and js libraries. They don't actually do anything, just save time bootstrapping.
You can always build from scratch too if you'd rather though
Shane Keulen
@SeeThruHead
Feb 03 2015 18:25
i like to use that stuff through browserify
pretty simple to setup like that
also the ability to require jade files for the client side is nice with browserify, but it seems you already thought of that with the clienttemplates extension
Jeff Escalante
@jescalan
Feb 03 2015 18:27
yup
you can also use the browserify extension and do it the other way if you want
Shane Keulen
@SeeThruHead
Feb 03 2015 18:27
does that extension work with the browserify extension?
is there a compatibility list for the core extensions somewhere?
maybe like a matrix showing what works with what might be nice
Jeff Escalante
@jescalan
Feb 03 2015 18:28
extensions to not work together in any way, they are independent
Shane Keulen
@SeeThruHead
Feb 03 2015 18:28
ah
Jeff Escalante
@jescalan
Feb 03 2015 18:28
we are looking into having them work together in some ways, but thats quite difficult
of an architecture thing
Shane Keulen
@SeeThruHead
Feb 03 2015 18:28
where does the client template stick the compiled functions?
Jeff Escalante
@jescalan
Feb 03 2015 18:29
wherever you specify. when using it with browserify, i'll usually just load em on to window then have the js pick them up from there
Shane Keulen
@SeeThruHead
Feb 03 2015 18:29
i should probably read some docs, instead of just asking these things
haha
thanks though
Jeff Escalante
@jescalan
Feb 03 2015 18:31
for sure. happy to answer if you have other Qs