resolves #1 - almost rewrite, lol

[tunnckoCore]

• rewrite tests
• add new test
• error handling
• add usage examples in readme
• add options in readme
• also we should add gulpplugin to keywords

[johno]

:heart_eyes_cat:

[johno]

This is awesome, @tunnckoCore . Thanks for your hard work!

[johno]

gulpplugin added to keywords.

[johno]

Closes #1.

[tunnckoCore]

haha, no prob :sweat_smile:

[johno]

Published to npm as version 1.0.0.

I've added a your twitter handle as a plug in the readme, too. Let me know if you'd like something different linked to. Thanks again!

[tunnckoCore]

@johnotander Thanks ;] What's you think for this https://github.com/tunnckoCore/gulp-remarkable? More style-ish, normalizing, plus automation, plus separation :) Simple npm test runs install, jshint, and tests.

Let me know if you want this PR, otherwise, no prob its just my style and "security", lol.

Btw, ready for merge -> pull -> npm publish, haha

[johno]

I love it.

The separation and jshinting is awesome. Though I wonder if the Makefile should be replaced with a gulpfile since it's a gulp plugin : ) ?

[tunnckoCore]

Hm, I forgot that fact, LOL :laughing: I will handle and that, no prob. But devDeps will count.

[johno]

Just a thought. If there's a good reason for a Makefile over a gulpfile in this scenario that I'm overlooking, please let me know.

IMO I don't think introducing a gulp devDependency is too worrisome for a gulp plugin.

Either way, thanks for the contributions. Greatly appreciated :beers: !

[tunnckoCore]

IMO I don't think introducing a gulp devDependency is too worrisome for a gulp plugin.

Agree.

Reason is "different people, different habits" - something for everyone. Also npm run and makefile is better than gulp, because stops if something isn't okey - i.e jshint-ish warrning/error, package.json parse error and so on. Actually I don't use gulp anywhere.

I don't know, maybe my implementation now for this gulpfile (v1.0.1 branch) is wrong? I mean, when jshint find "error/warning" (that is not actually real error) it continue to tests, try it. Set unused variable in some file and run gulp or gulp test and then try with npm test and makefile test.

[johno]

When I run the gulp command with your gulpfile, I get an error logged like I'd expect:

/Users/johno/code/frnt/gulp-remarkable/test/test.js
  line 17  col 5  'makeJsHintPissed' is defined but never used.

  ⚠  1 warning

But I guess your concern is that it doesn't terminate all processes when it arrives at an error? You can tell jshint to fail with:

gulp.task('lint', function () {
  gulp.src(['lib/*.js', 'test/*.js', 'index.js'])
    .pipe(jshint('.jshintrc'))
    .pipe(jshint.reporter('jshint-stylish'))
    .pipe(jshint.reporter('fail'));
});

However, it will still finish any other default tasks that are called.

[johno]

It seems most of the bases are covered since npm test and gulp lint will error out and the default gulp task will log an error.

I'd almost say that everything can be wrapped in the package.json with the npm commands. That'd be the lowest common denominator:

• npm run lint
• npm test
• etc.

[johno]

In fact, I say we can probably just roll with the npm scripts don't you think? No need for a gulpfile or Makefile.

[tunnckoCore]

Yea we can, but why not three variants, lol

How I think: I always provide and Makefile (for unix world) and Npm equivalents (in package.json for cross platform usage). Because I see in most places something like

"scripts": {
  "test": "make test"
}

wtf? Why the heck? :D Npm scripts is for node.js world, plain javascript running for the sake of cross-platfomability and Makefile for unix world - the good old SoC principal.

Gulp is cool, but in meantime no so.

[johno]

Haha, no worries. Let's roll with the Makefile then.

[tunnckoCore]

And npm scripts - its by default ;d

To send PR for v1.0.1 branch?

[johno]

Yep. A nice built in.

Yeah!