Rename .jsbeautifyrc to .atombeautifyrc about atom-beautify HOT 14 OPEN

Looks like something that will be intertwined with Unibeautify.

from atom-beautify.

+1 to that. We're way more than just jsbeautify already.

from atom-beautify.

+1 for changing the configuration file from .jsbeautifyrc to something like .atombeautifyrc.

from atom-beautify.

Should we support both with a deprecation warning or something?

from atom-beautify.

• Show deprecation warning
• Provide easy-button for users to automatically upgrade and rename their existing (found) .jsbeautifyrc files

from atom-beautify.

Blocked by #56, GUI for messages.

from atom-beautify.

I wouldn't change it from .jsbeautifyrc, because not everyone is using Atom. Also, I would actually just build a settings panel into Atom, because that is more across the board and less specific to each project.

from atom-beautify.

No longer seems to be picking up the .jsbeautifyrc I have in my project's root...
The settings panel is Ok, although it's massive length makes it very unfriendly to use, but an existing .jsbeautifyrc should override those settings (especially when working in a team that has set such a file globally for use by all IDEs)

from atom-beautify.

@nemoDreamer .jsbeautifyrc is still the goto file name, so there should not be any problems. The only time when that file is ignored, is if it is not either JSON or YAML and the parsing fails, then it will error silently and try to find other config files.

from atom-beautify.

Aha, I'll double-check my quotes etc. thanks!
On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 7:39 PM Glavin Wiechert [email protected]
wrote:

@nemoDreamer https://github.com/nemoDreamer .jsbeautifyrc is still the
goto file name, so there should not be any problems. The only time when
that file is ignored, is if it is not either JSON or YAML and the parsing
fails, then it will error silently and try to find other config files.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#41 (comment)
.

from atom-beautify.

I was thinking .beautifyrc. Thoughts?

from atom-beautify.

If the name is changing why not rename it to .unibeautifyrc in consideration for the future effort.

from atom-beautify.

@prettydiff I thought about that, too, however if .beautifyrc is not taken -- I think it is not -- then using only beautify may help strengthen the association between Unibeautify and beautification.

Unibeautify is the product name, however the problem is beautification. Instead of users thinking "I want to use Unibeautify", I want them to think "I want to beautify my code" and Unibeautify is just the implementation detail they consistently choose. In the same way "Google it" and "Search it" are synonymous, I want Unibeautify to become to "go to" for code beautification.

I want .beautifyrc to become the best standard for describing how we declare our code formatting configuration (similar to .editorconfig), regardless of Unibeautify being the runtime. However, let's make Unibeautify the best option available 😉 .

from atom-beautify.

Also, should make whatever that file ends up being easily portable. I can envision teams with their editors/IDEs needing to have the same beautification configuration so their source control doesn't keep picking up unnecessary changes.

from atom-beautify.