Add template for settings files #156
Conversation
|
Looks good, but the linter isn't happy |
|
I removed the linter check on the settings case as it will be hard to have a template that is compatible with all cases but don't raise errors. |
|
:'( I'm unable to reproduce the error locally... |
| activate: (app: JupyterFrontEnd{% if cookiecutter.has_settings.lower().startswith('y') %}, settingRegistry: ISettingRegistry | null{% endif %}) => { | ||
| console.log('JupyterLab extension {{ cookiecutter.labextension_name }} is activated!');{% if cookiecutter.has_settings.lower().startswith('y') %} | ||
|
|
||
| if(settingRegistry){ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe this was one of the lint issues:
| if(settingRegistry){ | |
| if (settingRegistry) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks @jtpio. Indeed that was part of the error (I correct it). But the linter is also complaining on the activate signature. If the setting registry is present, the two arguments needs to be put in separated lines. But with no settings, app argument is required to be inline. It seems unnecessary to add complexity to the template so that both cases pass the lint test.
fcollonval
force-pushed
the
fcollonval/issue90
branch
from
39d9e88 to
73f3373
Compare
|
@jtpio @blink1073 I rebased this PR. Tests are green. Could you have a second look please? |
Match template changes from jupyterlab/extension-cookiecutter-ts#156
* 'extension' to 'plugin' in README Match template changes from jupyterlab/extension-cookiecutter-ts#156 * Update src file * Fix new id Co-authored-by: Frédéric Collonval <[email protected]>
3 participants
Fixes #90