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

moved site-setup.scss into partials and site/ folder #89

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Nov 7, 2015

Conversation

una
Copy link
Owner

@una una commented Oct 31, 2015

Removes site bloat from source/ folder

@una una mentioned this pull request Oct 31, 2015
@m1
Copy link
Contributor

m1 commented Oct 31, 2015

Maybe move the gh page stuff out of master and put it into the gh-pages branch? Then instead of having the site folder you just have a dist folder? Like this: https://github.com/daneden/animate.css

@una
Copy link
Owner Author

una commented Oct 31, 2015

Hmm, how do you get a dynamically updated animate.min.css in a different branch? (that's why I kept it together for now) cc: @daneden

@m1
Copy link
Contributor

m1 commented Oct 31, 2015

You can checkout specific files eg:

git checkout gh-pages
git checkout master -- cssgram.min.css
git commit -m "Update css"

@una
Copy link
Owner Author

una commented Oct 31, 2015

But if this is intended for testing, people won't see their changes reflected until they do the above steps every time.

@m1
Copy link
Contributor

m1 commented Oct 31, 2015

It's not for testing, its for the /site folder to be moved from master to gh-pages. /test would stay on the master.

@una
Copy link
Owner Author

una commented Oct 31, 2015

In my opinion, I think test should stay with the site index -- they are both visual and front-facing assets which consume and demonstrate the library (as opposed to being the actual library)

@m1
Copy link
Contributor

m1 commented Oct 31, 2015

Hmm, I'm not so sure, like if you fork the repo and you want to do work on it you'll need the tests but you won't need the gh-site, you'll only need the site stuff if you want to directly work on the site, if that makes sense?

@una
Copy link
Owner Author

una commented Oct 31, 2015

This is a good point. Let me think it over tonight and I'll get back on this tomorrow 😄

Happy Halloween. Thanks for the input 👻

@m1
Copy link
Contributor

m1 commented Oct 31, 2015

Okay cool. Have a good Halloween! 🎃

@m1
Copy link
Contributor

m1 commented Nov 6, 2015

Any thoughts on this yet?

@una
Copy link
Owner Author

una commented Nov 6, 2015

Yeah, I think I agree with you :) will work on this tonight. Just going to not be able to use the gulp deploy script set up here

@una
Copy link
Owner Author

una commented Nov 7, 2015

This will be step 1 in the migration to only the gh-pages branch

una added a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 7, 2015
moved site-setup.scss into partials and site/ folder
@una una merged commit 226ba80 into master Nov 7, 2015
@una una deleted the enhancement/site-scss-moved branch November 7, 2015 00:36
@una
Copy link
Owner Author

una commented Nov 7, 2015

As I am doing this, I actually changed my mind -- I like how clean gh-pages branch is right now, and moving a build in there is just going to be a headache.

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 this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants