Conversation
|
Why does this need to be removed? |
|
One reason I think this should be avoided is that the concatenation mixes together different "types": Another issue is, if more options will be simply passed through to |
|
Yeah, that's tricky and I'm not sure what the right way forward is. My other concern is: Is it a good idea to pass through eleventy-img options? This makes it harder to switch to a different library in the future. Currently, parameters are passed through, but it's not publicly documented. What would be your suggestion? |
|
I think I'd be happy with It's true that this ties the plugin to its implementation details, but maybe that's okay. Also, in my short time with the plugin, this is the second time I've hit a case where the options not being passed through has been a bit confusing. (I've been trying to get the plugin to generate self-hosted AMP components but so far I haven't been able to figure out how to thread |
There's been quite a few problems with this (I've been working on the same). It should work now (see #35). |
I think this line should be removed. (It was added via #31.)
I think the cached images should be created directly in
outputDirrather than${outputDir}/${urlPath}, both for semantic reasons and also because this is how it's documented in the eleventy-img config.