3D widget template #50
Conversation
updated package.json dependencies to match latest generator-generator output minor changes to generator files - a few formating chagnes for new ejs template engine - importing yeoman.generator.Base directly major overhaul to test files - directly requiring/using yeoman-assert - using helper.run().inTmpDir() - using mkdrip instead of mkdir - removed load test - using before() instead of beforeAll() for all widget generator tests
Update from original
updated to latest yeoman-generator (0.22)
| name: '3D' | ||
| } | ||
| ] | ||
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is it valid to have a widget that is both 2d and 3d? Either way, we should add a validator to this prompt that ensures that at least one is checked, and possibly not allow both to be checked (in case that is not valid)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Initial research indicates that we should be scaffolding one or the other (2d or 3d), so this should become a radio button prompt. Maybe one day the WAB will support the idea of a single widget that can work in both 2d and 3d, but for now, you can see that most, if not all, of the OOTB widgets have separate 2d and 3d versions.
|
Thanks for this @jPurush! A good start. Raises a lot of questions. Here are some responses to the TODOs you list above
I think we'd leave the default to 1.3 until WAB 2.0 is out of beta. This raises the question, what if someone enters the path to a WAB 1.3 install while running the default generator and then tries to generate a 3d widget. Are we going to try and detect WAB capabilities at any point to prevent that, or just let that happen?
Oh man, a whole new stemapp folder. Makes sense, but that's going to impact the default generator too. How is it going to know which stemapp folder to copy a given widget to (if, for example, you had a project folder w/ both 2d and 3d widgets)?
Currently failing (need to add a 2d/3d response to the prompts passed in widget tests). Before trying to get them to pass however, this branch should be merged w/ current master (after #48). That should make it easier. Also see my questions in the line comments. All in all, I need to understand better how WAB 2.0beta works before I can answer any of these. I'm going to start on #45 so that I can get some insight. However all of this is making me realize that adding support for 3d is non-trivial, may introduce breaking changes, and should probably be included in the v2.0 release. cc @gavinr |
|
After talking w/ @gavinr, came up w/ the following:
I'll break the above out into issues in the next few days. I just wanted to document the decisions here for now. Once the issues are up we can decide if we'll continue to work on this branch (since it's a whole new direction). |
I've verified(manually, not via generator) the template to work in 2.0Beta, need to however do the following:
Also, if this is going to be post release of generator 2.0, maybe there is a way that doesn't need a separate 3D manifest.json file.