Rename exports #82
Rename exports #82
Conversation
CHANGELOG.md
Outdated
| @@ -13,6 +13,7 @@ | |||
| ### Changed | |||
|
|
|||
| - Fixed no-unused-expressions | |||
| - Removed `Microscopy` from export names | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The next release is 0.0.6 now.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Cool: Just pushed an update. (I've been putting "in progress" on the latest entry in the vitessce changelog, and stubbing out a new empty section when I make a release, so I remember to put incoming notes in the right place.)
src/index.js
Outdated
| @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ | |||
| import { MicroscopyViewerLayer } from './layers'; | |||
| import { MicroscopyViewer } from './microscopy-viewer'; | |||
|
|
|||
| export { MicroscopyViewerLayer, MicroscopyViewer }; | |||
| export { MicroscopyViewerLayer as ViewerLayer, MicroscopyViewer as Viewer }; | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not here, but I think we need to change MicroscopyViewerLayerBase as well for consistency.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes: I just wanted to make a PR that had the least chance of causing any merge headaches for now, and I'll be happy to do a thorough renaming afterwards. (but if you think consistency now is more important than getting something out quickly, that's reasonable, too.)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ok. I think it might be worth discussing calling the layer TileViewerLayer in anticipation of having an ImageViewerLayer (for mass-spec/codex). @manzt Do you have any opinions here? I think we'll need a wrapper around XRLayer but I am not sure.
Nils really wants the rename before Indiana starts using it. I think this was the name decided upon? Will follow up with renaming internals, but that doesn't need to block the next NPM release.