Hi and thanks a lot for all the work.
I had completely forgotten about wrap_tag_opts.
I feel it would make more sense to still have wrap_class_active to avoid having the active class on both elements.
What do you think?

I had completely forgotten about wrap_tag_opts.
I feel it would make more sense to still have wrap_class_active to avoid having the active class on both elements.

@danhper wouldn't it make sense to just have class_active and assign it to the wrap_tag instead of the link? This way we keep a single option to define the active class, and would probably be less of a breaking change in the next release.

Examples

active_link(conn, "Home", to: "/")
# <a class="active" href="/">Home</a>

active_link(conn, "Home", to: "/", wrap_tag: :li)
# <li class="active">
#   <a href="/">Home</a>
# </li>

active_link(conn, "Home", to: "/", wrap_tag: :li, class_active: "enabled")
# <li class="enabled">
#   <a href="/">Home</a>
# </li>

The wrap_tag_opts is still handy when you want more control over the wrapper:

active_link(conn, "Home",
  to: "/",
  class: "nav-link",
  wrap_tag: :li,
  wrap_tag_opts: [class: "nav-item"]
)
# <li class="active nav-item">
#   <a class="nav-link" href="/">Home</a>
# </li>

active_link(conn, "Home",
  to: "/",
  class: "nav-link",
  class_active: "enabled",
  wrap_tag: :li,
  wrap_tag_opts: [class: "nav-item"]
)
# <li class="enabled nav-item">
#   <a class="nav-link" href="/">Home</a>
# </li>

@danhper please let me know what you think about my comment above.

@sn3p Thanks for the proposal and sorry for the delay.

wouldn't it make sense to just have class_active and assign it to the wrap_tag instead of the link?

I think this is indeed simpler and should be enough to support any CSS framework so let's go with that. Thanks again!

What is the state of this PR? does it need some job tbd ?