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

Typescript definitions #647

Closed
DavidBM opened this issue Sep 23, 2018 · 5 comments · Fixed by #779
Closed

Typescript definitions #647

DavidBM opened this issue Sep 23, 2018 · 5 comments · Fixed by #779

Comments

@DavidBM
Copy link

DavidBM commented Sep 23, 2018

Hi!

We are starting to use this and we would like to know if anyone has some typescript definitions done. It would be a great addition to the project and would make very easy for the newcomers to the project.

@DavidBM
Copy link
Author

DavidBM commented Sep 25, 2018

I can try to help to create them too

@YoranBrondsema
Copy link
Collaborator

Hi @DavidBM, thank you for raising the issue. As far as I know, there are no Typescript definitions for mobiledoc-kit. Any initiative to get that effort started would be highly appreciated :-)

@DavidBM
Copy link
Author

DavidBM commented Sep 26, 2018

I just realized that there is a package that has started with the type for typescript.
https://github.com/bustle/mobiledoc-vdom-renderer/tree/master/types
Maybe asking to @dtetto for including them in the main project?

@apfelbox
Copy link

I also have a scrappy ~860 line TypeScript file, that partially describes the public API. I can link it here, if somebody needs it.

No guarantees about correctness and completeness though. 🙈

@reconbot
Copy link
Contributor

reconbot commented Dec 3, 2018

Hi @DavidBM I think we could copy any typescript defs into this project. No issues copying code from other bustle repos into this one.

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

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants