Include some Sass utilities ?

[pascalduez]

Should we include some mixins / functions ?

Right now CSS & Sass are empty.

[KittyGiraudel]

First question is: should we include Sass? Chances are high that a SassDoc user uses Sass everywhere but still.

[pascalduez]

The user is prompted on whether to use Sass or not. Default to true. With a friendly little trolling if he don't.

[KittyGiraudel]

Nice one. :P

[pascalduez]

Should we prompt for LESS usage ?

--> :door:

[KittyGiraudel]

Could you add an extra question if the user replies "yes", to ask him if he'd like utilities?

[pascalduez]

Could you add an extra question if the user replies "yes", to ask him if he'd like utilities?

Yep, will do.

[KittyGiraudel]

Cool. ;)

[pascalduez]

Added, it's mostly stuff from the sassdoc-theme-light minus the too specific ones. Maybe @HugoGiraudel you could check if that okay for you ?

[KittyGiraudel]

Why inline comments?

[KittyGiraudel]

Let's get rid of:

• opposite-direction
• clamp
• z
• $z-indexes

[pascalduez]

Why inline comments?

Hé hé, I was waiting this. Would one want to document its theme Sass files, for an already documented Sass project ? Sassception. Well that's already what we do in core :)

[KittyGiraudel]

Then get rid of all comments.

[pascalduez]

I think they are useful. Switch back to CDoc style ?

[KittyGiraudel]

Having inline comments here is really confusing.

[pascalduez]

Agree, I switch back to CDoc

[pascalduez]

opacity mixin requires clamp.

[KittyGiraudel]

Just don't clamp the input value. ;)

[pascalduez]

Done. Feel free to fiddle in there if you want to improve.