feature: allow sites to be disabled through file naming #60
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
A small change that allows a site file configuration to be disabled by ending it with `.disabled.js`. I've found this easier/preferable to temporarily deleting the file. Another approach would be to add a `enabled: true/false` property, but this was simpler to implement -- and I think it's more obvious if a site is disabled. Maybe you'll like the idea.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
A small change that allows a site file configuration to be disabled by ending it with
.disabled.js.I've found this easier/preferable to temporarily deleting the file.
Another approach would be to add a
enabled: true/falseproperty, but this was simpler to implement -- and I think it's more obvious if a site is disabled.Maybe you'll like the idea.
Update
I've now seen it's possible to add a
skip: trueparameter.I think that makes this PR not required -- however I think this could have been more obvious, open to a PR adding that to the readme?