Closed adamkiss closed 8 years ago
Seems reasonable. Just a couple things:
namespace
. Thoughts?To be honest, I haven't touched README yet, because I didn't think this was production ready; I wasn't sure if pulling what's implemented (using if option === 'implementedOption
) and sending the rest to gray-matter is a good way.
group
with namespace
is okay with me.Ah okay, I didn't realize this was still a WIP.
The general approach of pulling the metalsmith-matters
-specific options out of the options argument and sending the rest to gray-matter
seems reasonable to me. There are perhaps a few things that could be done to make the code look cleaner, but overall it looks pretty good.
Why? Did you have other ideas in mind for the API?
I just sometimes overthink things :)
Right, so I changed the option to namespace
, added namespacing if only a string is passed as options, and update the readme.
If it's good for you, you can bump the version and release.
Go ahead and release this :)
There we go. Sorry it took me so long to get to this. I'll cut a new release now.
For one of my metalsmith installations, I'd like to have all files' metadata grouped under
page.*
(e.g.page.title
).This is a quick (and naive) implementation of this functionality to open communication about it. It passes tests, but it introduces first non-gray-matter option, so you might want me to implement it in different way (or add other tests, based on comments in
test/index.js
)