docs: Add 'No-Build Workflows' doc, focusing on importmaps (for now) #1175
Conversation
content/en/guide/v10/importmaps.md
Outdated
| <script type="importmap"> | ||
| { | ||
| "imports": { | ||
| "preact": "https://esm.sh/[email protected]", | ||
| "preact/": "https://esm.sh/[email protected]/", | ||
| "react": "https://esm.sh/[email protected]/compat", | ||
| "react/": "https://esm.sh/[email protected]/compat/", | ||
| "react-dom": "https://esm.sh/[email protected]/compat", | ||
| "@mui/material": "https://esm.sh/@mui/material?external=react,react-dom" | ||
| } | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Let's just push for this one instead of the ?alias think. I've found that people are less likely to shoot themselves in the foot with this looking at past support questions in Fresh.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sure, sounds good.
Any other situations and/or examples you want to see added to help Fresh people? I realize there's been a fair bit of struggling over there so if our docs could help at all, that'd be great. I did take a quick skim but it seemed to (largely) be people struggling with specific dependencies rather than anything major conceptually.
| For a more full example, see [Using Preact with HTM and ImportMaps](#using-preact-with-htm-and-importmaps), and for more information on HTM, check out its [documentation][htm]. | ||
| For a more scalable solution, see [Import Maps -- Basic Usage](/guide/v10/no-build-workflows#basic-usage), and for more information on HTM, check out its [documentation][htm]. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do we want to refer to import maps as more scalable? Obviously HTTP imports have "issues", but I'm not sure of the language here.
| @@ -0,0 +1,123 @@ | |||
| --- | |||
| name: No-Build Workflows | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Switched this over to 'No-Build Workflows' instead, as an importmap-specific page felt unnecessary. Granted, this might be a bit confusing for Deno users, but I felt that the ability to more info here in the future for buildless workflows is of more benefit.
Will think on it, anyhow. Opinions certainly welcome (as always).
rschristian
changed the title
rschristian
changed the title
Partially address #1116