why doesn't 'watch' include autoprefixer? about hugulp

[jbrodriguez]

Autoprefixer doesn't appear to run during watch, only during build

The idea is that autoprefixer is an 'enhancement/optimization', so it runs during the build step which is where you optimize the site.

If you run automated tests, you could still run them against the full build (public folder).

I now check in static/images and since I'm using sass, check in assets/styles, and addtionally assets/javascript

Not sure about which artifacts in static you refer to or about the previews.

[levidrain]

Perhaps my workflow needs work. Currently, I start hugulp in watch mode, and hugo server -w. I'm usually tweeting styles and html and checking the results.
I'm using flexbox for layout, which still requires browser prefixes for some properties. Which means the site doesn't layout correctly unless i do a full build.
We use Forestry.io which is a web CMS on top of hugo. However, they expect all the css to be in a final state and checked into the static folder. Since their preview functionality doesn't run the optimization, the preview displays without prefixes as well.

I don't really think of prefixing as an optimization. To me, optimization doesn't alter the behavior of the assets, they just shrink their size. Prefixing potentially changes the behavior of css, since you could have a pretty different results in browsers without them.

[jbrodriguez]

I don't really think of prefixing as an optimization

I can see where you're coming from and now that you mention it, it makes sense.

I had thought about having separate pipelines, one for build and one for watch.

Maybe this builds up the case to do it.

Have you looked at the code / thought about what changes you would make ?

[levidrain]

Let me start by saying I love the tool. Version 2 has been great asset for us.
The only suggestions I have are:

• the css prefix issue mentioned in this thread
• we use bulma.io installed via npm, so our sass file has imports like, "../../../node_modules/bulma/bulma". Some of the other build steps allow configuration to be passed. It would be a nice to have to pass sass include folders.
• it would be useful to make js-linting an optional step in the pipeline. There's lots of languages that transpile to js and for those linting isn't as useful.

[jbrodriguez]

Thanks for the reply !

I'll be looking into it.