This PR adds a "new file" template for CSS files. It's meant to be a follow-up/replacement for PR #607.
Following the discussion there the template includes the ```{fileheader}``` token and only minimal CSS content without much placeholders bloating up the file.
IMHO we cannot predict much about how a typical CSS file would look like so a minimal template seems to be the best solution. The ```{fileheader}``` token might be the most important part of the template file :smirk: You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:
https://github.com/geany/geany/pull/2259
-- Commit Summary --
* Added template file for CSS
-- File Changes --
M data/Makefile.am (1) A data/templates/files/file.css (10)
-- Patch Links --
https://github.com/geany/geany/pull/2259.patch https://github.com/geany/geany/pull/2259.diff
Looks ok. I doubt it will ever get used, but has minimal cost to add.
Yeah, I don't feel strong on this one either. In the original post it seemed to be reasonable for some people. The original PR is already 4 years old and the original source branch seems to have been removed. Let's close #607 by merging this one or let's close both if it's not going to be merged (would be fine for me also).
What do other people think (merge or reject)?
This seems weird to have a template where the first thing everyone's going to do is to delete the contents wholesale. No matter what we put is going to be arbitrary and not useful (unless it's something large like a [CSS reset or such](https://github.com/necolas/normalize.css/blob/master/normalize.css)), so it might be better to stick with something simple like below instead of something more advanced like media queries:
```css /* Replace this with your CSS styles */ h1 { font-color: red; } ```
Even the `{fileheader}` isn't so useful as the GPL is rarely used in front-web projects [citation needed], so it's even more stuff to delete.
That said, I don't use any of these templates, and as @elextr said it's not much maintenance cost, so I'm not strongly opposed.
I still don't have a strong opinion, but as is the file doesn't seem very useful. I tend to agree with @codebrainz, mostly because in 2019 it's likely user CSS will add rules on top of a framework, and if it's not it's likely be to either highly complex or very simple.
If we suppose very simple is a thing for CSS, maybe just having kind of an example file with `h1`, setting the `a` color, and setting a global font or so makes sense, but it'll likely be more of a "look at how CSS looks" than a really useful template.
@b4n: ok, adjusted the content: now we just have a body with a font, some bold headings and some link settings.
Apart from t hat I agree to all points mentioning the limited use of a CSS template file and would also be fine with closing this un-merged.
If nobody except @franco999 in 2015, including this pull requestor, is convinced this is useful, then I guess it should be closed?
Isn't there some kind of Geany "user resources" forum / wiki where users upload filedefs, templates, ctags etc? I think this would fit well there. This doesn't add any bloat (as per my understanding what this discussion is about^^) to Geany.
@b4n, @codebrainz, @elextr: ping. What's the final decission? Merge or close it unmerged? I'm fine with both, just want to get the ticket done.
IMO @codebrainz said it above.
Closing due to lack of interest, feel free to re-open if anyone feeling strongly comes along.
Closed #2259.
github-comments@lists.geany.org