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

fix: [#189] Fix .hamlc is unexpectedly processed by JstProcessor #190

Closed

Conversation

voducvu
Copy link
Contributor

@voducvu voducvu commented Jun 24, 2024

Separate mimetype for .hamlc and .jst.hamlc so that the hamlc is only processed by HamlCoffeeAssets::Transformer and jst.haml is processed by ::HamlCoffeeAssets::Transformer and JstProcessor

Copy link
Collaborator

@mathieujobin mathieujobin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@phenchaw Can you have a look at this patch please?

Copy link
Collaborator

@mathieujobin mathieujobin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

appears to work with Sprockets 3 but not 4 ?!?

please have a look at the tests results

@mathieujobin
Copy link
Collaborator

@voducvu seems like something is broken with sprockets 4

can you please have a look ?

@voducvu
Copy link
Contributor Author

voducvu commented Jul 16, 2024

@mathieujobin Sorry, i'm quite busy now. I'll look into it when I have more time.

@ashkulz
Copy link
Contributor

ashkulz commented Jul 19, 2024

Depending on which one gets merged first, this PR or #191 may need to be adjusted since there's a conflict.

@ashkulz
Copy link
Contributor

ashkulz commented Jul 19, 2024

@mathieujobin please see 3922a3c -- it's an issue with Rack 3 compatibility and makes the CI green. Should I make it as a separate PR?

Copy link
Collaborator

@mathieujobin mathieujobin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I assume this was equivalent to #191 but we don't need both right?
I'm surprise to see a merge conflicts between the two.

please open a new PR if what is merged is incomplete.

thanks

@voducvu
Copy link
Contributor Author

voducvu commented Jul 20, 2024

@mathieujobin it's not equivalent to #191. Please help me merge #192.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants