Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Bugfix/fixing storybook venia ui #1945
Bugfix/fixing storybook venia ui #1945
Changes from 7 commits
60445b4
027ccff
4f0c509
a68b274
903702b
a8826c9
ff4d83b
749acff
c4b72e4
dc474fc
410863a
794413e
47191fe
45eeffa
82fe5f4
401fff0
a7ba81c
7795f61
2ff60c9
38544d6
1c434cd
62de623
cb4526b
d195d5e
1e0a4f0
9eca071
ae9f529
b37839d
e224820
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The idea is that
peregrine
is used byvenia-ui
is used byvenia-concept
. This seems like a red flag to me? But maybe I'm misunderstanding peer deps :PI think this, along with the imports of
venia-concept
files invenia-ui
just seem like red flags to me in terms of where we are supposed to be keeping these things. Maybe in the future we will move the majority of the base config to the top-level andvenia-concept
andvenia-ui/storybook
can just import/use it.TL;DR - I think I'm fine with this, just rambling.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah I think for the storefront app that's correct. For Storybook we relaxed the rules a bit so we could run it easily.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah, it's a tough call. I do think @sirugh has the right of it here.
It's true that
venia-ui
components are hard to render without the glue thatvenia-concept
adds, so we need to get that glue from somewhere. Butvenia-ui
is built to be a dependency ofvenia-concept
, so I'd prefer that it didn't listvenia-concept
as a dependency or import anything from it. Thinking about our various options here:store.js
,webpack.config.js
, andindex.css
venia-concept
venia-ui
storybook stories intovenia-concept
Overall, I would accept the approach in this PR because the work's been put in, it has value, and only the Storybook files are importing from
venia-concept
. But eventually I want to remove the circular dependency.