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

feat: Add Prettier and Tailwind's Prettier plugin to templates #516

Closed
t3dotgg opened this issue Sep 28, 2022 · 7 comments · Fixed by #517
Closed

feat: Add Prettier and Tailwind's Prettier plugin to templates #516

t3dotgg opened this issue Sep 28, 2022 · 7 comments · Fixed by #517
Labels
💬 discussion Issue needs further discussion before decision

Comments

@t3dotgg
Copy link
Member

t3dotgg commented Sep 28, 2022

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.

I got so excited thinking this was done already lol. I'm ready to die on this hill we should add this but I'll poll chat in a second

Describe the solution you'd like to see

I'd like to see chat agree w/ me that this should be added by default

Desribe alternate solutions

Theo being sad :(

Additional information

No response

@t3dotgg
Copy link
Member Author

t3dotgg commented Sep 28, 2022

Looking like a resounding YES
image

@t3dotgg
Copy link
Member Author

t3dotgg commented Sep 28, 2022

Also fwiw
image

@nexxeln
Copy link
Member

nexxeln commented Sep 29, 2022

🥴

@b3nten
Copy link

b3nten commented Sep 29, 2022

Including prettier breaches the line between opinions on tech versus opinions on code style. Should lint rules be added as well?

@nexxeln nexxeln added the 💬 discussion Issue needs further discussion before decision label Sep 29, 2022
@c-ehrlich
Copy link
Member

I'd be in favor of including a minimal prettier config that's basically only the tailwind plugin. Would consider other settings if someone can make a good case for why we should include them. I don't think we need to have opinions about single vs double quotes or whatever.

@johnslemmer
Copy link

johnslemmer commented Sep 30, 2022

I'm confused why this discussion was closed. There isn't much discussion. And the linked PR doesn't actually do the work asked for in the description. If there is some sort of discussion happening in back channels can that at least be posted here for others to understand the conclusion that was arrived at?

sorry :homer-disappear: thanks @nexxeln

@nexxeln
Copy link
Member

nexxeln commented Sep 30, 2022

I'm confused why this discussion was closed. There isn't much discussion. And the linked PR doesn't actually do the work asked for in the description. If there is some sort of discussion happening in back channels can that at least be posted here for others to understand the conclusion that was arrived at?

It was implemented in #517. See the comment above.

image

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
💬 discussion Issue needs further discussion before decision
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

5 participants