You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I love that you have an e2e test to confirm that it basically works. 😄 One of the biggest issues I've encountered with templates I maintain is the difficult of making changes as they grow more complex. As you expand and perhaps include optional features, this may be a good time to start producing the webpack configs programmatically, with e2e tests for each individual feature (and combination of features).
A resource that may be helpful is maintainable-webpack-config. It's a very immature experiment in programmatically producing a validated and tested Webpack config. May be useful as inspiration.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I'm generally against providing an abstraction on top of webpack. There's lots of those projects around that aim to make webpack config "easier", and if it floats your boat you can definitely use them after ejecting!
Thanks for the suggestion! We will stick with a “vanilla” config because people will want to customize it after ejecting, and we don’t want to lock them into using a third-party project for that.
I love that you have an e2e test to confirm that it basically works. 😄 One of the biggest issues I've encountered with templates I maintain is the difficult of making changes as they grow more complex. As you expand and perhaps include optional features, this may be a good time to start producing the webpack configs programmatically, with e2e tests for each individual feature (and combination of features).
A resource that may be helpful is maintainable-webpack-config. It's a very immature experiment in programmatically producing a validated and tested Webpack config. May be useful as inspiration.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: