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

[Feature Request] Autoprefixer #779

Closed
Th3Whit3Wolf opened this issue Aug 15, 2019 · 4 comments

Comments

@Th3Whit3Wolf
Copy link

commented Aug 15, 2019

Autoprefixers parse CSS and adds vendor prefixes. This creates consistency so that a developer on Firefox creates the same webpage on Chrome, Opera, and Edge as they have on their own browser.

I have found this but it hasn't been touched in two years and is incomplete. Is this something this project would be interested in?

@Keats

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

commented Aug 15, 2019

It would be somewhat interesting but that adds a lot of complexity to Zola configuration:

I think for now it's a no but if there is a mature & actively maintained equivalent for both browserlist and autoprefixer, it would certainly make sense.

@Keats

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

commented Aug 15, 2019

I've created https://zola.discourse.group/t/add-autoprefixer/176/2 so it's not forgotten

@psnszsn

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Aug 19, 2019

I think the right path would be to add PostCSS support. This would allow the use of autoprefixer, but also other PostCSS plugins, like Tailwind CSS. It should work like sass (add files to the postcss dir and the output appears in public). The postcss.config.js file should probably also be in the postcss dir, so no extra config fields in config.toml needed.
That would mean running the postcss executable form rust. Is that a no-go? (this is also the way Hugo does it)

@Keats

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

commented Aug 22, 2019

That would mean running the postcss executable form rust. Is that a no-go? (this is also the way Hugo does it)

I'm not super interested in that approach, the main draw to Zola for me is that it is a single binary. Having to install node + npm install some libraries is not a great workflow imo. If you wanted to do that, you don't need to go through zola imo you can just write a small make file for it.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
3 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.