Consistency improvements to several package descriptions #6494
Conversation
🦋 Changeset detectedLatest commit: 673e448 The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump. Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are. Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR |
github-actions
bot
added
pkg: integration
| @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ | |||
| { | |||
| "name": "@astrojs/alpinejs", | |||
| "description": "The official Alpine.js integration for Astro.", | |||
| "description": "Use Alpine within Astro", | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
"Within" sounds a little formal here. Is there another word that's accurate enough and doesn't sound weird? "with" or "in"... 😆
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think "with" is fine, I used "within" just to be consistent with the other UI framework integration packages, they all follow "Use (React) components within Astro". The "components" part doesn't apply to Alpine because it's more of additional methods and properties to use in HTML. So, if we change this, I'd also feel like changing the other UI frameworks to use "with" too, what do you think?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@Yan-Thomas I am generally happier using "with" unless you really mean to emphasize inside. The place I mostly use "within" in docs is to say that something has to be located "within" src/pages/ (meaning, anywhere inside, including a subdirectory.) I could also see using it "within a component..." or "within your template..." again, meaning inside.
So if you want to update others to say "with" I think that's great! I also think if people are searching, they're more likely to type "How do I use Alpine with Astro" (or "and Astro") not "within."
Changes
Changed several package descriptions so they all are following the same rules and display better in the
astro.buildsite.Testing
I hope changing a description doesn't break packages 😬
Docs
Docs, docs, and docs.
/cc @withastro/maintainers-docs for feedback!