rails new cool_app --minimal

[hahmed]

Summary

discussion: https://discuss.rubyonrails.org/t/interactive-rails-new/74355/50

rails new cool_app --minimal

A minimal rails stack to get you started, everything that is excluded:

• skip_action_cable
• skip_action_mailbox
• skip_action_mailer
• skip_action_text
• skip_active_job
• skip_active_storage
• skip_bootsnap
• skip_jbuilder
• skip_spring
• skip_system_tests
• skip_turbolinks
• skip_webpack
• Sprockets should have JavaScript folders by default
• rails new --minimal webpack=react works

Rails app I created using the minimal flag:

• https://github.com/hahmed/cool_app_minimal rails new cool_app_minimal --minimal
• https://github.com/hahmed/cool_app_minimal_react rails new cool_app_minimal_react --minimal --webpack=react

Want to help test out this PR? here is how:

• Pull down this branch
• Uninstall your local rails copy using gem uninstall rails
• Move into the root directory where you pulled down the rails code, then install: rake install
• Run rails --version which should be Rails 6.1.0.alpha
• In another directory create your rails app rails new cool_app --minimal

[ccasabona]

This is a good idea though I would suggest keeping Action Mailer. If I were just starting with Rails and had to deal with webpacker, I probably would have skipped it altogether.

[IvanShamatov]

This can be set in your .railsrc file in Home directory, like default flags for running rails new

# .railsrc
-d postgresql
--skip-action-mailbox
--skip-active-storage
--skip-action-cable
--skip-spring
--skip-sprockets
--skip-turbolinks
-T
--webpacker=react

[prathamesh-sonpatki]

Instead of skipping few of the frameworks by default, making command line interactive will be good.

rails new chotu --interactive

- Install Action Cable? Yes/no?

-

[hahmed]

Instead of skipping few of the frameworks by default, making command line interactive will be good.

@prathamesh-sonpatki sounds good, from the discussion I linked above, dhh mentioned 3 things, interactive mode, minimal mode, and add stacks back in if you left them out.

Hopefully will tackle them in separate PR's, actually I'm going to mention that in the description above. If DHH drops the minimal for interactive, I will just go ahead and do that in this PR 👍

[hahmed]

This can be set in your .railsrc file in Home directory,

@IvanShamatov cool, this came out of the discussion linked in the description, we are going to provide an easy way to create a minimal rails app via the cli

[dhh]

I like the idea of both minimal and interactive. Minimal really should be truly minimal, though. No webpacker, no Turbolinks, no action mailer, etc. Just action pack + active record (and the dependencies, railties + active support etc).

[ccasabona]

This would simplify using Rails for first-time users. I’ve been using Rails since V2, and I may have given up if I’d had to deal with getting everything working with the complexities of webpacker. I did use ActionMailer from the beginning, but it is easy enough to add needed components.

…

On May 14, 2020, at 1:54 PM, David Heinemeier Hansson ***@***.***> wrote: I like the idea of both minimal and interactive. Minimal really should be truly minimal, though. No webpacker, no Turbolinks, no action mailer, etc. Just action pack + active record (and the dependencies, railties + active support etc). — You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#39282 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABQTUITGVVZGEBCQYFWJZN3RRQV5ZANCNFSM4NATQJGA>.

[mikkovedru]

@prathamesh-sonpatki

Instead of skipping few of the frameworks by default, making command line interactive will be good.

rails new chotu --interactive
> - Install Action Cable? Yes/no?

The interactive mode would certainly benefit experienced developers, but it would help new/inexperienced people the most. Therefore instead of displaying only a module name (not necessarily previously known to a new developer), it would be good to display more information than that. And here we can have two possible solutions:

1. Automatically explain what this specific option means and what it is used for. Short and to the point (maybe with an official documentation URL, which explains this module in more detail).
2. In addition to "Yes/No" also allow to choose "Help", which would explain the purpose and the ramifications of enabling/disabling the module in more detail. Since the help was requested separately, it means that the user is fine with getting more text on the screen.
3. Both. Automatically display a short description, but when requested separately, explain the module in even more detail.

[simi]

What about to call it "classic" instead of "minimal?

[dhh]

Classic gives it an air of cool that I'm not interested in. It's not about reminiscing of some glorious past. It's just "I want the bare minimum". On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 9:04 PM "github.com" <notifications@github.com> wrote: “ What about to call it "classic" instead of "minimal?” — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.

[bhaibel]

This is a reflection of work that’s being coordinated in https://discuss.rubyonrails.org/t/interactive-rails-new/74355 — the —interactive flag has been discussed there as a separate feature idea. -- --Betsy

[dhh]

I'd like us to really go minimal here, so let's add a few more skips:

• skip_system_tests (and minimal has this on)
• skip_jbuilder (and minimal has this on)

But then, conversely, we should consider actually preconfiguring sprockets for JavaScript in this mode.

[dhh]

We should also allow you to start from the negative --minimal base, and then add things back in. So --minimal --webpack=react should work and do the right thing.

[hahmed]

Did you want to remove these from --minimal too?

group :development do
  # Access an interactive console on exception pages or by calling 'console' anywhere in the code.
  gem 'web-console', '>= 3.3.0'
  # Display performance information such as SQL time and flame graphs for each request in your browser.
  # Can be configured to work on production as well see: https://github.com/MiniProfiler/rack-mini-profiler/blob/master/README.md
  gem 'rack-mini-profiler', '~> 2.0'
  gem 'listen', '~> 3.2'
end

[dhh]

Let's just leave that stuff there for now. Although that listen gem looks like maybe it should have been part of skip spring? Thought that was what it was for?

[dhh]

  # Use an evented file watcher to asynchronously detect changes in source code,
  # routes, locales, etc. This feature depends on the listen gem.
  config.file_watcher = ActiveSupport::EventedFileUpdateChecker

So no, we need the listen gem.

[dhh]

Actually, on second thought, let's remove the rack-mini-profiler and the web-console. Maybe something like skip_dev_gems or something. Point of --minimal is to pare this all the way down.

[hahmed]

  # Use an evented file watcher to asynchronously detect changes in source code,
  # routes, locales, etc. This feature depends on the listen gem.
  <%= '# ' unless depend_on_listen? %>config.file_watcher = ActiveSupport::EventedFileUpdateChecker

We use to the EventedFileUpdateChecker when the listen gem has been added, otherwise we stay with the default FileUpdateChecker (I was digging into this a while back, so not sure about the full context if we only use the FileUpdateChecker)

Will leave the listen gem 👍

[hahmed]

@dhh this is ready, let me know if there is anything I have missed?

[dhh]

Will review and test. It looks good, just want to test.

[KevinBongart]

Should the rails --help text be updated as part of this PR?

[dhh]

I've been stuck testing this because rails webpacker:install no longer runs for me on master. Haven't diagnosed it fully. I'm fine on the 6.0.3 release, but running this task on master just hangs. I don't think it's specific to this PR, though. But need to figure it out before we can move forward.

[dhh]

Sorry, I was stuck due to a recursive issue with bin/yarn (it'll loop on itself if you have ./bin in your path!). Now that I've run things through, it generally seems good, but I noticed that Active Job is still included by default. Let's take that out.

[dhh]

Otherwise, I think we're good with a rebase to merge.

[hahmed]

but I noticed that Active Job is still included by default. Let's take that out.

Cool, that's been done 👍

[sjayanna]

Awesome!

[Erol]

❤️

[matheussilvasantos]

Just wondering if it's worth to add what is remaining when using minimal somewhere in the documentation, at first saw it wasn't clear for me.

[Drenmi]

I can confirm that attempting to use this as a base, and selectively re-enabling libraries using --no-skip-* is currently not working. Will have a look and see if I can chip in here.

$ rails -v
Rails 6.1.0