While testing the codemods on some projects, I noticed some issues with the migration to the new in-* variant.
One such example is that we checked for & at the end, instead of & (the whitespace is significant).
This meant that [figure>&]:my-0 was converted to in-[figure>]:my-0 which is wrong. In this case, we want to keep it as [figure>&]:my-0.
Additionally this PR brings back the migration from group-[]:flex to in-[.group]:flex. If you are using a prefix, then group-[]:tw-flex is migrated to tw:in-[.tw\:group]:flex.
Last but not least, this does some internal refactors to group migrations logically together.
While testing the codemods on some projects, I noticed some issues with the migration to the new
in-*variant.One such example is that we checked for
&at the end, instead of&(the whitespace is significant).This meant that
[figure>&]:my-0was converted toin-[figure>]:my-0which is wrong. In this case, we want to keep it as[figure>&]:my-0.Additionally this PR brings back the migration from
group-[]:flextoin-[.group]:flex. If you are using a prefix, thengroup-[]:tw-flexis migrated totw:in-[.tw\:group]:flex.Last but not least, this does some internal refactors to group migrations logically together.