Pass all config in constructor

[kievechua]

Is there a plan to pass config as following?

var Metalsmith = require('metalsmith');
Metalsmith({
  "source": "src",
  "destination": "build",
  "plugins": [
    {"metalsmith-drafts": true},
    {"metalsmith-markdown": true},
    {"metalsmith-permalinks": "posts/:title"},
    {"metalsmith-templates": "handlebars"}
  ]
})
.build()

[Ajedi32]

Hmm, yeah it does seem like a good idea to expose an API for building a Metalsmith object from the config file format used by the CLI. Not sure we'd be able to implement this the exact same way though, as the constructor function currently requires a directory argument, which isn't provided in that example.

Seems like a pretty reasonable request though. Also probably worth mentioning #205 here, since that's somewhat related...

[kievechua]

Maybe we can just introduce options parameter?

var Metalsmith = require('metalsmith');
Metalsmith(directory, {
  "source": "src",
  "destination": "build",
  "plugins": [
    {"metalsmith-drafts": true},
    {"metalsmith-markdown": true},
    {"metalsmith-permalinks": "posts/:title"},
    {"metalsmith-templates": "handlebars"}
  ]
})
.build()

This way it's backward compatible and nothing have to change for the Metalsmith config.

[Ajedi32]

@kievechua Something like that could work. Though as I alluded to in my previous comment, if we're splitting the CLI out from Metalsmith it might be better to include this API in that project instead. I'm not completely sure though.

What's the use-case for this? Are you just looking for a cleaner API?

[kievechua]

We're thinking of building it with build system like fly or etc.
That's the only use case now.

Let me know if there's a better way to do it.

[Ajedi32]

Well for now you can always just use the existing API right?

This feature wouldn't really add any new functionality, it'd just be an extra way of configuring Metalsmith using a different API.

[kievechua]

No worry on it, I'm using existing method to call on it.
Since the cli already can pass all the config in 1 shot, just wondering why not reuse it.
I don't want to have a duplicate config, just want to share it when using cli or programatic.