consider using assemble for building pages?
jonschlinkert opened this issue · comments
If you would consider adding assemble I would be happy to submit a PR.
Essentially all this would do is split the HTML into a few different files, heading, footer, etc. allowing devs to easily modify the markup (and paths to CSS/JS, etc) to meet their own preferences.
The config would look something like this:
/**
* Build HTML
* https://github.com/assemble/assemble
* Generates clean HTML from templates and data.
*/
assemble: {
options: {
assets: '<%= project.assets %>',
partials: ['src/templates/includes/*.hbs'],
layout: 'src/templates/layouts/default.hbs'
},
dist: {
files: {
'app/': ['src/templates/*.hbs']
}
}
},
Hey Jon, this would be good as a separate project/branch/version of FS, but I don't think tying a user into a language too early on is the best idea. Some might want PHP, Java, .NET - or just static HTML. I think leaving this to the developer is a good shout :)
Lol, so you're worried about uses wanting PHP, Java, or .NET on a static HTML, javascript/node.js boilerplate?
@jonschlinkert I don't see Fireshell as a static pages boilerplate, it's just a build tool for any kind of pages/sites.
@jonschlinkert Exactly, no where does it say anything about the back-end code that needs to be used or the templating system. (I should have rephrased my comment in a better way)
Point is, Fireshell provides the front-end boilerplate (i.e starting point for any kind of project, all projects start static) + build tool which you can use to build a PHP site/app or whatsoever.
Some users just kick-start their projects with Fireshell and build apps with PHP as the server-side language, and in that case using PHP for the page includes and templates would make more sense.
@jonschlinkert By the way, I would definitely use assemble on a project of mine! So I'm not against it, but I do understand why Todd would want to leave the templating system out and up to the user.