Skip to content

Conversation

@jimfb
Copy link
Contributor

@jimfb jimfb commented Feb 4, 2016

Mostly for shits and giggles, but I was curious to see how often this would fire on my devserver (ie. curious if it actually creates a migration burden, because code wins arguments).

Fixes #5926, FWIW. This would need lots more discussion before we could actually consider merging such a thing.

@quantizor
Copy link
Contributor

Is there a plan to support for vs htmlFor as well?

@jimfb
Copy link
Contributor Author

jimfb commented Feb 18, 2016

If we were to change className->class, we would also change htmlFor->for. But any such change is clearly in the 'exploration' stage rather than the 'implementation' stage.

@jimfb jimfb force-pushed the classname-class branch from 76260b5 to 0b45aa2 Compare March 10, 2016 17:03
@facebook-github-bot
Copy link
Contributor

@jimfb updated the pull request.

@mikeybox
Copy link

@jimfb has this been reviewed and is it likely to be included in a v15 minor release?
thanks.

@jimfb
Copy link
Contributor Author

jimfb commented Apr 11, 2016

@mikeybox No, there is a long road and many discussions between here and there.

@mikeybox
Copy link

@jimfb thanks for the update

@gaearon
Copy link
Collaborator

gaearon commented Jun 26, 2016

I’ll close because this doesn’t merge cleanly and we don’t seem to want to do this in the short term. We might want to reopen some day but I’d expect we’d have a more solid plan around this by that time.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants