Closed pokonski closed 7 months ago
@pokonski The speed/lower memory use does look amazing. What's your feeling about the compromise of including mrml-ruby
binaries when the default is not to use them? Should this be a fork?
If not, it'd be great if you could update the README and write a test when using the use_mrml
flag.
I've also fixed the GitHub Action now for Ruby 2.7, so if you merge from master
it should all work again.
What's your feeling about the compromise of including mrml-ruby binaries when the default is not to use them? Should this be a fork?
Good question, I am not opposed but ultimately I can make it a "peer" dependency and check if it's present inside the parser with if defined?(MRML)
and raise error in case it is not loaded. MRML makes the whole library simpler, but fragmenting the userbase of mjml-rails
with frivolous forking wouldn't be my first choice 😁
If not, it'd be great if you could update the README and write a test when using the use_mrml flag.
Will do, I didn't focus on tests initially because I wasn't sure if such addition is desired :)
Would be great to see this implemented! 😄
@sighmon I updated the documentation and made mrml
a "peer" dependency. Will add some tests too :)
I also added tests for MrmlParser, CI is now green in my fork:
https://github.com/pokonski/mjml-rails/actions/runs/7488219746/job/20382217087
let me know if anything else is missing :)
That works for me! Thanks so much - I'll create a release today.
Awesome, thank you!
This proof of concept change would allow using Rust implementation of MJML called MRML via the mrml-ruby gem.
The benefits:
Would anyone except me find this useful?
References:
MRML isn't 100% compatible with MJML, so I made it optional.