3 ms·
While you're technically correct, what I gathered from their experience is the consistency of usage, between not only their own projects but third-party project
by fukawi2 2y ago
While you're technically correct, what I gathered from their experience is the consistency of usage, between not only their own projects but third-party projects too.
They could make technical improvements to their own Makefiles, sure. But it's more about being able to enter a project and have a consistent experience in "getting started".
- ReleaseCandidat 2y ago> But it's more about being able to enter a project and have a consistent experience in "getting started". I'd say putting the Makefile content in `package.json` would be more consistent, especially as they are already using Gulp as the build system.
- croemer 2y agoYou can't put comments in package.json, JSON should never have been used for something maintained by humans.
- ReleaseCandidat 2y agoWe are not arguing whether not declaring phony targets is worse than using comments in `package.json`? But anyway, comments in a Makefile or `package.json` are not documentation anyway, that's what the `README` or `INSTALL` (or whatever) is there for (in projects like the one the Makefile is written for).