Fork me on GitHub
#luminus
<
2016-07-26
>
shaun-mahood21:07:12

@yogthos: For CLJS support in Luminus, have you got any desire to support a wider range of options beyond what's there right now? I think there could be some value in adding more cljs specific profiles to Luminus but I'm not sure whether it's worth the added overhead to support them.

yogthos21:07:53

The maintenance has been the main concern for me

yogthos21:07:53

if it’s just an extension on the current stack I don’t think it would be problematic

yogthos21:07:01

for example, it might make sense to add +reframe

yogthos21:07:39

and it could be possible to refactor +cljs to only add cljs support without reagent and create +reagent, +re-frame profiles explicitly

shaun-mahood21:07:40

Am I right in assuming that you want to keep everything reagent? If so, I think there could be a reasonable size of options (+re-frame, +devcards, etc.) that could cover most of the reagent space without crazy extra maintenance.

shaun-mahood21:07:25

Alternatively, adding a basic +rum or +om might be reasonable but would probably mean it would be too much to go into depth on any of them.

shaun-mahood22:07:34

I'm up for doing some work towards either of those directions depending on where you want to take the cljs profiles over time.

yogthos22:07:16

Yeah I'd definitely like to stick with reagent for the time being, and re-frame/devcards sounds good to me if you'd like to take a look

shaun-mahood22:07:58

Ok great, I'll see what I can get working towards that side of things.