-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 18
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(simpleList): rename isCurrent to isActive #186
feat(simpleList): rename isCurrent to isActive #186
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good. It's done the same way in several areas but I'm wondering if we should provide a default message for renameProp. Otherwise only use renameProps (even if only a single rename in it like is done in chartVoronoiContainer-remove-allowTooltip
) as it already provides default messages. Would remove duplicate or inconsistent verbiage.
Many of the places where singular renameProp
is used is to provide a custom message on purpose - see accordion-remove-noBoxShadow
for example. Might make sense to allow a message
prop (even in renameProps
) and allow that to override the default if necessary... but always provide the default.
Added a separate issue to address: #187
@gitdallas agree, I think it would be beneficial to do one of those. Not sure what the better approach would be off the top of my head though. Along a similar line of thinking, while I wrote this I debated throwing together a generator or something to do the standard 1 component, 1 prop name being changed codemod like we have here. I figure this format will be pretty common and can probably be at least 99% automated in most cases. WDYT? |
@wise-king-sullyman if i understand you correctly, that already exists. https://github.com/patternfly/pf-codemods/blob/master/generate.js |
@gitdallas that's similar, but not as specific. I whipped together a version of what I was thinking of here: #190 It would be for these basic single component 1:1 prop replacements specifically, which seem somewhat common. Though maybe it's a bit too specific to be all that useful. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Just some conflicts to resolve but otherwise looks good! Would be worth placing the section in the README alphabetically as part of resolving those
4aa5c7a
to
25e2c70
Compare
Closes #133