Introduce config/addons.js for addon macro-config #2155
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
simonihmig
force-pushed
the
si-addon-config
branch
from
653ddf6
to
5d4173d
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This is integrating https:/simonihmig/ember-addon-config directly into the macros package, as we discussed earlier.
For the motivation see the addon's Readme. tl;dr: make it easy for users to set addon config, without fiddling with
ember-cli-build.js(an outdated concept) and@embroider/macrosconfiguration (an implementation detail, users shouldn't need to know what macros are).We wanted to have the config ideally as ESM, but I failed to make this work, not sure if this is possible. See simonihmig/ember-addon-config#3. But also I feel this is not a show-stopper, as all other node.js config files in an Ember app (
ember-cli-build.js, ' config/environment.js,config/targets.js` etc.) are all still CJS...Open question: is it ok to land this only as a "user-land" feature, or should this be part of an RFC, as it would become a "public API" of the overall framework experience? Could be part of the app v2 RFC?
Keeping this in draft state for now, but please review and share feedback already!
To Do: