{{ message }}
Repository navigation
Submission request, next.js template #73
Description
Hi, I opened this issue to submit a Next.js template to the store.
The template uses the new serverless mode introduced in Next.js 8 to create a single file for each page.
It was built based on the node10-express-template in a way it is compatible with the features of the base template.
It comes with 2 sample pages and the pages include emotion for styling:
- '/': Home page
- '/about': About page
You can check it deployed here.
Please feel free to reach me if you have any suggestions about how to make the template better or if you encounter any issue.
The template is openfaas-serverless-nextjs-template.
Thanks.
Activity
alexellis commentedon Apr 22, 2019
Thanks for your PR.
What does the "8" refer to?
johnnyeric commentedon Apr 22, 2019
Hi, it refers to the version which the serverless mode was introduced.
https://nextjs.org/blog/next-8
Thinking about it now, maybe it is not necessary.
alexellis commentedon May 11, 2019
@johnnyeric I like this, but I'm a bit confused about the README - I'm seeing examples of the node10-express template mixed in.
Can you re-write the docs or help me understand how the two play together? I'd love to see something like this merged and available in the store.
Alex
johnnyeric commentedon May 11, 2019
Hi @alexellis, thanks for reviewing this.
I have improved some parts of the template and I've now updated the README with better explanations about how it works and how to customize.
About the examples, my idea was that this template was fully compatible with the node10-express template, but I improved that by defining more focused examples while giving the ability to use the context features.
Can you please take a look again?
Please, let me know if you find it is ok, then I can send a pull request.
alexellis commentedon May 12, 2019
Thanks @johnnyeric 👍
@kenfdev @burtonr do either of you have time to have a more detailed look at the template?
alexellis commentedon Oct 28, 2019
Ping cc @phumberdroz
phumberdroz commentedon Oct 28, 2019
The only thing that looks conflicting to me is that Root License is MIT and the NPM package is marked as ISC besides that the code looks fine.
johnnyeric commentedon Oct 28, 2019
Hi @phumberdroz, thanks for reviewing the template. I adjusted the license on the package.json files on my repo.
mbrowne commentedon Mar 3, 2022
Is this going to be reviewed again?