Skip to content

feat!: Remove Tailwind syntax in favor of external tailwind-csstree #166

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

Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

nzakas
Copy link
Member

@nzakas nzakas commented Jun 6, 2025

Prerequisites checklist

What is the purpose of this pull request?

Updated Tailwind support recommend using the tailwind-csstree package that I wrote on my own time. It covers Tailwind 3 and 4 and is much more robust than what we had in this plugin.

What changes did you make? (Give an overview)

  • Updated README to recommend installing tailwind-csstree
  • Removed the /syntax entrypoint from package.json and jsr.json
  • Removed build scripts for /syntax
  • Removed source code for /syntax

Related Issues

Is there anything you'd like reviewers to focus on?

@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this to Needs Triage in Triage Jun 6, 2025
@eslint-github-bot
Copy link

Hi @nzakas!, thanks for the Pull Request

The pull request title isn't properly formatted. We ask that you update the pull request title to match this format, as we use it to generate changelogs and automate releases.

  • The length of the commit message must be less than or equal to 72

To Fix: You can fix this problem by clicking 'Edit' next to the pull request title at the top of this page.

Read more about contributing to ESLint here

@nzakas nzakas changed the title feat!: Remove Tailwind syntax in favor of external tailwind-csstree package feat!: Remove Tailwind syntax in favor of external tailwind-csstree Jun 6, 2025
@fasttime fasttime moved this from Needs Triage to Triaging in Triage Jun 10, 2025
@fasttime fasttime moved this from Triaging to Implementing in Triage Jun 10, 2025
@fasttime fasttime added the accepted There is consensus among the team that this change meets the criteria for inclusion label Jun 10, 2025
@fasttime fasttime requested a review from Copilot June 10, 2025 09:23
Copy link

@Copilot Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull Request Overview

This PR removes the built-in Tailwind CSS syntax support and updates the plugin to rely on the external tailwind-csstree package.

  • Eliminates internal /syntax source, build configs, and TS configs
  • Updates tests and docs to import tailwind-csstree instead of the removed tailwindSyntax
  • Cleans up package exports, build scripts, and dependencies

Reviewed Changes

Copilot reviewed 8 out of 8 changed files in this pull request and generated no comments.

Show a summary per file
File Description
tsconfig.syntax.json Removed TS config for internal syntax output
tests/rules/no-invalid-at-rules.test.js Switched customSyntax imports from internal to tailwind3
src/syntax/tailwind-syntax.js Deleted internal Tailwind syntax definitions
src/syntax/index.js Removed re-export of tailwindSyntax
rollup.config.js Dropped the syntax bundle configuration
package.json Removed syntax entrypoint, adjusted build scripts, added dependency
jsr.json Removed ./syntax export
README.md Updated docs to install and import from tailwind-csstree
Comments suppressed due to low confidence (2)

README.md:233

  • The README example imports tailwind4 but tests and the package use tailwind3. Update the example to match the actual export (e.g. tailwind3) or clarify version support.
import { tailwind4 } from "tailwind-csstree";

package.json:106

  • [nitpick] Consider moving tailwind-csstree from devDependencies to peerDependencies so that consumers explicitly install a compatible version rather than relying on your dev setup.
"tailwind-csstree": "^0.1.0",

Copy link
Member

@fasttime fasttime left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, thanks! Leaving open for a second review.

@fasttime fasttime moved this from Implementing to Second Review Needed in Triage Jun 10, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
accepted There is consensus among the team that this change meets the criteria for inclusion breaking feature
Projects
Status: Second Review Needed
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants