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

Update docs & readme #123

Closed
10 tasks
icebob opened this issue Feb 15, 2017 · 25 comments
Closed
10 tasks

Update docs & readme #123

icebob opened this issue Feb 15, 2017 · 25 comments

Comments

@icebob
Copy link
Member

icebob commented Feb 15, 2017

After #120 we need to update docs & readme

  • Update docs on gitbook
    • rewrite examples
    • refresh "Install" & "Usage" section (how to use full & core bundle)
    • refresh "Features" section
    • add info about bundle sizes
    • refresh dependencies (remove momentjs)

  • Update readme
    • rewrite examples
    • refresh "Install" & "Usage" section (how to use full & core bundle)
    • refresh "Features" section
    • add info about bundle sizes
    • refresh dependencies (remove momentjs)
@icebob icebob changed the title 📝 Update docs & readme Update docs & readme Feb 15, 2017
@icebob icebob added this to the v2.0.0 milestone Feb 15, 2017
@lionel-bijaoui
Copy link
Member

I'm on it, but I don't think I will have the time to do everything

@icebob
Copy link
Member Author

icebob commented Feb 15, 2017

OK, I can help you!

@lionel-bijaoui
Copy link
Member

Ok, I will inform you when I finished. Thank you !

@lionel-bijaoui
Copy link
Member

lionel-bijaoui commented Feb 15, 2017

I don't know how to handle the new hierarchy of fields.
Should we do something that show the need for dependency:

  • build in (mixing core and optional field)
  • optional
    • jquery
    • vanilla

OR

Should we show what's in core vs optional:

  • core
  • optional (mixing dependent and independent)

I'm for the second option, since we explicitly say which dependency have each field in its description.
What are your thought ?

@icebob
Copy link
Member Author

icebob commented Feb 15, 2017

I agree the second option.

@lionel-bijaoui
Copy link
Member

lionel-bijaoui commented Feb 15, 2017

I have added this into the custom field page

if you decide to release your custom field into the wild, please open an issue so we can add you to a list on the README

I think we should encourage people to release their own custom field. Can we agree on a naming convention for vfg custom field ?

  • vue-form-generator-my-field
  • vfg-my-field
  • vue-form-generator-plugin-my-field
  • vfg-plugin-my-field

That would allow people to find other custom field easily. What do you think about that ?

@icebob
Copy link
Member Author

icebob commented Feb 15, 2017

I prefer vfg-my-field.

vue-form-generator.... is too long.
vfg-plugin.... I think it is confuse, because it is not plugin. It is a field or component.

@icebob
Copy link
Member Author

icebob commented Feb 15, 2017

Or vfg-field-mystuff
E.g.:
vfg-field-calendar
vfg-field-awesome-dropdown

@lionel-bijaoui
Copy link
Member

I like your proposition. It keep the current naming convention used internally.
We should mention this somewhere on the README to encourage people ! 😃

@lionel-bijaoui
Copy link
Member

I just realized that I don't know how to use the core version.

// the normal way
import VueFormGenerator from "vue-form-generator";

I'm really confuse as to how this is going to work

// the "core" way ???
import VueFormGenerator from "vue-form-generator/dist/vue-form-generator-core.js";

@icebob
Copy link
Member Author

icebob commented Feb 15, 2017

The code is correct, but ugly 😕

@icebob
Copy link
Member Author

icebob commented Feb 15, 2017

But this is the correct way. Like with Vue when you want to use the vue.common.js. Vue solution is you need to create an alias in webpack config

@lionel-bijaoui
Copy link
Member

Have you tested it ?
BTW, I think we should use an alias for the "utils" folder.

@lionel-bijaoui
Copy link
Member

Also, we never mention how to use the css file.

@cristijora
Copy link
Collaborator

Why not rename this to common.js or core.js without having the whole vue-form-generator...
Once you try to import from the npm directory you know that it's the form generator.

@lionel-bijaoui
Copy link
Member

lionel-bijaoui commented Feb 15, 2017

Yeah, like full.js and core.js. I fear that common.js might get mixed up with CommonJS specific usage.
As for the CSS, I did that:

<style  src="../../dist/vue-form-generator-core.css"></style>

Good news is that it work, bad news is that it look bad with all the style in the dev environment..

@cristijora
Copy link
Collaborator

Yeah full.js and 'core.js` sounds fine. What do you mean it looks bad ?

@lionel-bijaoui
Copy link
Member

lionel-bijaoui commented Feb 15, 2017

@cristijora maybe an in-between with vfg-core.js and vfg.js ?
I mean that some element don't look the same when you include the css extracted from vfg.
EDIT: and it look bad when you don't include boostrap, but that's to be expected.

@cristijora
Copy link
Collaborator

Hm, actually yeah. I think that one is the best option so far.

@icebob
Copy link
Member Author

icebob commented Feb 15, 2017

Other solution is, we drop the dist folder and place bundles js & css to root of repo.
In this case the links look as:

import vfgCore from "vue-form-generator/vfg-core.js";
import vfgFull from "vue-form-generator";

import "vue-form-generator/vfg-core.css";

@icebob
Copy link
Member Author

icebob commented Feb 15, 2017

What is the problem with extracted CSS? I didn't find any problem. Please make a screenshot.

@lionel-bijaoui
Copy link
Member

@icebob I think I'm finished with the doc. Not everything is done, so I let you take a look.

@icebob
Copy link
Member Author

icebob commented Feb 20, 2017

Sorry for late. I was ill. Thanks. I'll check it

@icebob
Copy link
Member Author

icebob commented Feb 20, 2017

I checked, I think it's correct. I fix some examples and make some minor changes.
I will update the README.

@icebob
Copy link
Member Author

icebob commented Mar 1, 2017

Done

@icebob icebob closed this as completed Mar 1, 2017
icebob added a commit that referenced this issue Mar 1, 2017
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