Use umbrella apps names instead of "default"

[agonzalezro]

When adding more than one app to your umbrella project you can't use default for tailwind and esbuild configurations or they will clash between them. By using their names instead of "default" the issue is fixed.

Closes #5631

Steps to test it (assuming you are using phoenix mix from source code):

1. mix phx.new --umbrella /tmp/a
2. mix phx.new.web /tmp/a_umbrella/apps/b
3. Change config/runtime.exs & config/dev.exs to change one of the apps to listen in something that isn't 4000.
4. cd /tmp/a_umbrella && mix ecto.migrate

[josevalim]

We also need to change mix.exs. I would actually go ahead and change this for regular apps as well. :)

[josevalim]

I think we don't need the quotes, the web app name should be a valid identifier.

[agonzalezro]

@josevalim I've changed it for single apps as well and remove the extra quotes. However, I am not sure what needs to be done in mix.exs.

[josevalim]

The aliases like assets.setup need to pass the namespace now, otherwise they default to “default”, no? You can generate the app and give it a try!

[agonzalezro]

Understood @josevalim, fixed with the last commit. Thanks for the heads up!

[agonzalezro]

The tests are failing because of the formatter, example:

❯ mix do format --check-formatted
...
** (Mix) mix format failed due to --check-formatted.
The following files are not formatted:

/private/tmp/w/mix.exs

       |
75 75  |      "assets.setup": ["tailwind.install --if-missing", "esbuild.install --if-missing"],
76 76  |      "assets.build": ["tailwind w", "esbuild w"],
77    -|      "assets.deploy":
78    -|        ["tailwind w --minify", "esbuild w --minify", "phx.digest"]
   77 +|      "assets.deploy": ["tailwind w --minify", "esbuild w --minify", "phx.digest"]
79 78  |    ]
80 79  |  end
       |

The problem I see now is that either with inspect or IO.puts I would need to mimic what the formatter does. Is there any reason why the output of the template generation isn't being formatted as another step?

[josevalim]

You can always break them over multiple lines and the formatter will always be happy with it. :)

[agonzalezro]

Could the faulty test be flaky? I can't rerun, maybe it would fix it?

Also, I am not extremely happy about how I solved the multi-line, any suggestion would be more than welcomed!

Thanks 🙏🏽

[josevalim]

💚 💙 💜 💛 ❤️