Skip to content

This issue was moved to a discussion.

You can continue the conversation there. Go to discussion →

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

[✨] API similar to Astro's Content Collections API #77

Closed
rshackleton opened this issue May 20, 2023 · 3 comments
Closed

[✨] API similar to Astro's Content Collections API #77

rshackleton opened this issue May 20, 2023 · 3 comments
Labels
[STAGE-2] incomplete implementation Remove this label when implementation is complete [STAGE-2] not fully covered by tests yet Remove this label when tests are verified to cover the implementation [STAGE-2] unresolved discussions left Remove this label when all critical discussions are resolved on the issue [STAGE-3] docs changes not added yet Remove this label when the necessary documentation for the feature / change is added [STAGE-3] missing 2 reviews for RFC PRs Remove this label when at least 2 core team members reviewed and approved the RFC implementation

Comments

@rshackleton
Copy link

Is your feature request related to a problem?

When working with MDX files it is non-trivial to create dynamic list pages or sitemaps using that data.

Describe the solution you'd like

An ideal solution would be an equivalent API to Astro's own Content Collections API.

Describe alternatives you've considered

I have not yet looked into this but I will be aiming to create a custom vite plugin to read MDX files at compile time and expose the slugs and frontmatter via a virtual module.

Additional context

No response

@rshackleton
Copy link
Author

rshackleton commented May 25, 2023

I've started creating a package for this here:

https://github.com/rshackleton/rshackleton-qwik/tree/main/packages/vite-mdx-collections

It doesn't include any type generation or validation currently, but it does read and expose the data for use.

@appinteractive
Copy link

any updates on that issue?

@gioboa
Copy link
Member

gioboa commented Oct 14, 2024

We moved this issue to qwik-evolution repo to create a RFC discussion for this.
Here is our Qwik RFC process thanks.

@gioboa gioboa transferred this issue from QwikDev/qwik Oct 14, 2024
@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this to In Progress (STAGE 2) in Qwik Evolution Oct 14, 2024
@github-actions github-actions bot added [STAGE-2] incomplete implementation Remove this label when implementation is complete [STAGE-2] not fully covered by tests yet Remove this label when tests are verified to cover the implementation [STAGE-2] unresolved discussions left Remove this label when all critical discussions are resolved on the issue [STAGE-3] docs changes not added yet Remove this label when the necessary documentation for the feature / change is added [STAGE-3] missing 2 reviews for RFC PRs Remove this label when at least 2 core team members reviewed and approved the RFC implementation labels Oct 14, 2024
@QwikDev QwikDev locked and limited conversation to collaborators Oct 14, 2024
@gioboa gioboa converted this issue into discussion #152 Oct 14, 2024
@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this from In Progress (STAGE 2) to Released as Stable (STAGE 5) in Qwik Evolution Oct 14, 2024
@shairez shairez removed this from Qwik Evolution Oct 15, 2024

This issue was moved to a discussion.

You can continue the conversation there. Go to discussion →

Labels
[STAGE-2] incomplete implementation Remove this label when implementation is complete [STAGE-2] not fully covered by tests yet Remove this label when tests are verified to cover the implementation [STAGE-2] unresolved discussions left Remove this label when all critical discussions are resolved on the issue [STAGE-3] docs changes not added yet Remove this label when the necessary documentation for the feature / change is added [STAGE-3] missing 2 reviews for RFC PRs Remove this label when at least 2 core team members reviewed and approved the RFC implementation
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants