Skip to content
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

EJS views #69

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

EJS views #69

wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

strawhatgami
Copy link

Hi,

I'm adapting Jingo to my app, where views are written in EJS.
These views produces similar outputs compared to those written in jade.

@claudioc
Copy link
Owner

Hi!

to be honest, if I will start jecho now I'd probably use EJS. Jade has some nice feature, but the ability to use HTML templates with just some additional markup (the ejs one) is – imho – a major reason to use it.

The "problem" is that there are users who have changed jingo templates for their own purpose and I don't think that changing the template system would be fair. The problem is maintenance: using both syntaxes together, means that I'd have to change two separate sets of files which is not a good idea.

Thank you very much for the PR, anyway: maybe I'll merge it for Jingo 3 :)

@ryanvarick
Copy link

I am using something similar locally, except with Handlebars instead. It might be a good idea to think about how Jingo could support user-provided "themes" with whatever layout engine Express can handle, perhaps even installable via NPM. That way people could still customize, but you wouldn't have to support two (or more!) separate layouts.

@strawhatgami
Copy link
Author

@claudioc Glad you like it!
@ryanvarick I'm adaptating Jingo to mount it as a subapp, and the ability to set an arbitrary layout I need (among others) looks like "user-provided themes".
More in next PR soon :-)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants