-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 160
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
Add support for Babel #110
Conversation
return gulp.src('lib/**/*.js') | ||
.pipe(babel()) | ||
.pipe(gulp.dest('dist')); | ||
}); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I wasn't sure what do make this task, since there's no "build" step in place.
Any reason to include I think you missed the build step in the package.json file. |
re: babelrc. I meant to ask about that actually. Many node packages opt to use Babel's loose mode but we don't really recommend using it unless you understand the caveats. So I removed loose mode from the babelrc. However the babelrc is really the best place to configure Babel as many people end up using babel in several different ways (ie. gulp-babel, babel/register, etc.). I was wondering if I should add more options to the babelrc generator to configure common Babel options? |
Ah, I don't think so. I believe the simpler the better in the case of generator-node - at least to start with. Maybe someone else on the team have another opinion though, I'm open to discussion. |
assert.fileContent('test/index.js', 'describe(\'my-module\''); | ||
}); | ||
}); | ||
|
||
describe('node:boilerplate --no-babel', function() { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
function () {
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes it is :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Luckily these comments won't be necessary once the new generator-node is out ;)
👍 |
Neat work @thejameskyle |
Quick question while rebasing. I ran into a spot where See: var istanbul = require('gulp-istanbul');
<% if (includeCoveralls) { -%>
var coveralls = require('gulp-coveralls');
<% } -%> |
@thejameskyle It's explained in the yeoman-generator v0.20 release notes :) |
Oh sweet, I'm going to take advantage of that |
Need to fix the merge conflict but this looks good to me! 👍 |
ping |
Updated |
}, | ||
|
||
writing: function () { | ||
this.fs.copy( | ||
this.templatePath('index.js'), | ||
this.destinationPath('lib/index.js') | ||
this.destinationPath('lib/index.js'), | ||
{ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
this.destinationPath('lib/index.js'), {
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Whoops, missed this one. Fixed now
cc @SBoudrias if he has any final thoughts. This LGTM. Thanks @thejameskyle. |
LGTM. Can you squash the commits? We'll probably be good to release 1.0.0 after this is merged. |
Squashed |
Thanks @thejameskyle! |
👍 |
Resolves #95