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

Make our micro-libraries more like other Idiomatic JavaScript micro-libraries #1481

Closed
dchambers opened this issue Jul 29, 2015 · 8 comments
Closed
Assignees
Milestone

Comments

@dchambers
Copy link
Contributor

Here's a list of improvements to bring us more in line with standard practice these days:

  1. Use karma, mocha & chai instead of jasmine for testing.
  2. Use browserify instead of webbuilder for building.
  3. Use eslint for linting.
  4. Use npm instead of Grunt as our build tool.
  5. Use standard directory names: lib -> src, spec -> test & target -> dist.
  6. Use npm test for running all tests, including a locally run browser test against Firefox, and SauceLab tests against various other browsers.
  7. Stop using jsdoc, and use example driven README.md based documentation only.
  8. Stop creating browser-modules compatible distributions of our libraries, that even we don't use.
  9. Use a master branch instead of a gh-pages branch for simplicity, and get rid of the extra styling, and links to the different presentations of the exact same content.
  10. Use : as a delimiter to indicate sub-tasks.
  11. Stop using browser detection guards within code and tests, and instead let browserify provide a consistent environment.
  12. Stop using Bower.

Additionally, we should provide a npm run test:browser:debug task that makes it easy for developers to debug the tests within a browser.

@dchambers dchambers self-assigned this Jul 29, 2015
@dchambers dchambers added this to the 1.1 milestone Jul 29, 2015
@dchambers
Copy link
Contributor Author

This has now been done for emitr.

@dchambers dchambers changed the title Make our micro-libraries more idiosyncratic Make our micro-libraries more like other idiosyncratic JavaScript micro-libraries Jul 31, 2015
@dchambers
Copy link
Contributor Author

Although things are now much simpler than they were before, the release process is still too complicated, so I've created #1490 to help with this.

@andy-berry-dev andy-berry-dev changed the title Make our micro-libraries more like other idiosyncratic JavaScript micro-libraries Make our micro-libraries more like other Idiomatic JavaScript micro-libraries Aug 13, 2015
@dchambers
Copy link
Contributor Author

@andyberry88, you happy for this to be moved to ReadyForTest?

@andy-berry-dev
Copy link
Member

👍

@andy-berry-dev
Copy link
Member

@dchambers is there a PR that updates the mico-libraries to the latest versions?

@dchambers
Copy link
Contributor Author

@andyberry88, no, I just went ahead and made the changes in the master branches of the various projects. This is actually what we've always done, where the QA effort is used to confirm that it's safe to consume the changes within BRJS.

This is clearly not the right way of doing things, but is probably a consequence of the fact that it's not easy to manage sprints that involve multiple projects.

@andy-berry-dev
Copy link
Member

@dchambers We need a PR in BRJS to update each library to the latest version. Otherwise we just have a series of microlibraries that have changed but we're not making use of those changes in BRJS.

@dchambers
Copy link
Contributor Author

Here are the relevant commits:

all of which are long since merged into master.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants