Feedback on the Repository Setup

PSchmiedmayer commented 10 months ago

Problem

The current NextJS Template repository contains the following elements that will serve as the basis for the Spezi Template Web Dashboard and other non-Spezi-related projects:

Automated tests + code coverage report using https://jestjs.io/ & codecov
Automated Documentation Deployment using https://typedoc.org/
Automated deployment of the Next.js app to GitHub pages: https://spezi.health/SpeziTemplateWebDashboard/
Linting and a way to fix errors locally using ESLint and prettier.
REUSE specification conformance
Docker files and a docker compose setup
An automated setup to push the docker images to the GitHub docker hub: https://github.com/StanfordSpezi/SpeziTemplateWebDashboard/pkgs/container/spezitemplatewebdashboard
Local smaller npm packages that can be used to develop the packages in a modular fashion; you can add as many as you want in the packages/* folder and then just need to make slight adjustments to add them to where they are currently referenced.

Solution

It would be great to get feedback on the current setup and how we can improve it.

This mainly relates to these areas:

Number of configuration files: It would be great to see if we can condense the number of configuration files. Compared to a Swift Package that only contains a few root-level configuration files, a Node/NextJS/React/npm setup seems to ask for a new configuration file for every small task ...
Local package TS to JS conversion. The current setup is not ideal, as the local dependencies have to be explicitly mentioned in the main package.json file as pre steps for some of their elements so they are correctly transformed into JS representations. It would be great to see if we can automatize the setup.
Documentation representation: It seems like typedoc does not properly resolve the root title of the project and seems to struggle with light/dark mode representations of images. Somehow, styling the docs to look nicer would also be great.
Test coverage: It seems like only the main /app folder is covered using the test coverage setup. It would be great if we could explore how to also record coverage for the /packages.

Additional context

No response

Code of Conduct

[X] I agree to follow this project's Code of Conduct and Contributing Guidelines

PSchmiedmayer commented 10 months ago

@vishnuravi @Supereg @ckunchur Would be great to get our input and feedback on the current setup. Not ideal but I think that we are already on a good track. Some more eyes looking at the challenges and providing insights on the setup would definitely help!

PSchmiedmayer commented 10 months ago

@vishnuravi What type of CSS setup should we use, would be great to discuss this here.

Can we also integrate: https://storybook.js.org.

Can we incorporate some aspect from https://github.com/Blazity/next-enterprise?

vishnuravi commented 10 months ago

@vishnuravi What type of CSS setup should we use, would be great to discuss this here.

I think we should use Tailwind CSS. It is widely used, well-maintained, and recommended in the Next.js documentation. PR #13 adds Tailwind to the project.

PSchmiedmayer commented 10 months ago

Thank you @vishnuravi; I just reviewed and merged the PR.

It would be amazing if you have a good idea or suggestions on how to address some of the other issues noted above 👍

StanfordBDHG / NextJSTemplate