Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Upgrade Jeet to version 7 #2059

Closed
ragesoss opened this issue Oct 8, 2018 · 7 comments
Closed

Upgrade Jeet to version 7 #2059

ragesoss opened this issue Oct 8, 2018 · 7 comments

Comments

@ragesoss
Copy link
Member

ragesoss commented Oct 8, 2018

We currently use Jeet 6.x to provide grid layouts in our CSS. Upgrading to the latest version will require some changes: the location of the files we need to import is different, and some of the functions that jeet provides are used in various stylesheets and need to be renamed (cf(), at least).

Migration guide: https://github.com/mojotech/jeet/wiki/Migrating-from-6-to-7

@asquare14
Copy link
Contributor

I would like to work on this @ragesoss :)

@hardy1334
Copy link
Contributor

hardy1334 commented Feb 14, 2019

@ragesoss in this issue,we need to rename the functions for Jeet 7.0.0 and modify the import statements respectively, anything else ?

@hardy1334
Copy link
Contributor

@ragesoss I upgraded jeet version to 7.2.0 , css files compiled properly with no warnings or errors but the grid layout changes.

screenshot from 2019-02-18 21-30-03

@Tripathi-Vaibhav
Copy link

So after upgrading Jeet to 7.2.0 what exactly is the problem ?

@ragesoss
Copy link
Member Author

Looks like this one is done, we just forgot to close the issue.

@Tripathi-Vaibhav
Copy link

Ok, No problem then.
Can you provide some basic bugs or issues in order to contribute to this project as I'm new to Wikimedia

@ragesoss
Copy link
Member Author

This one you commented on might be a good place to start: #3643

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants