Support a configurable template file extension #265
Comments
gettoarun
added a commit
to gettoarun/eta
that referenced
this issue
Nov 18, 2023
Added unit test coverage to the two new possibilities and it works for existing .eta formats as well.
gettoarun
changed the title
gettoarun
added a commit
to gettoarun/eta-docs
that referenced
this issue
Nov 18, 2023
nebrelbug
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Nov 30, 2023
* Fixes for #265 - Enable support for default extensions. Added unit test coverage to the two new possibilities and it works for existing .eta formats as well. * Removed .bak file generated from a diff tool
|
Closed by #266 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
Currently, Eta supports templates with fullname + extension or it assumes an extension ".eta". This works best for most cases as files usually have an extension. But there are several files without extensions like Dockerfile, README etc, which are files that would not have an extension. This will force consumers to use read file, Eta.renderString and save file.
Describe the solution you'd like
Eta has a solid defaults / config mechanism with EtaConfig. A new defaultExtension could bring out a better defaulting for template files.
Providing an override defaultExtension: "" could help solve a no-extension file, providing defaultExtension: "jsp" or "asp" could start get interesting as well.
Describe alternatives you've considered
The only alternative i see with forced defaulting is that a consumer system adopt a
Additional context
N/A
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: