fix: subscription page title is broken #1738
Conversation
WalkthroughAdds Changes
Estimated code review effort🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~12 minutes
Suggested labels
Poem
Pre-merge checks and finishing touches❌ Failed checks (1 warning, 2 inconclusive)
✅ Passed checks (2 passed)
✨ Finishing touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (6)
assets/js/ai-form-builder.min.jsis excluded by!**/*.min.jsassets/js/forms-list.min.jsis excluded by!**/*.min.jsassets/js/forms-list.min.js.mapis excluded by!**/*.map,!**/*.min.js.mapassets/js/frontend-subscriptions.min.jsis excluded by!**/*.min.jsassets/js/subscriptions.min.jsis excluded by!**/*.min.jspackage-lock.jsonis excluded by!**/package-lock.json
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
package.json(1 hunks)tailwind.config.js(2 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (2)
tailwind.config.js (1)
34-43: The empty options object is correct and intentional.The
isolateInsideOfContainerstrategy accepts optional configuration parameters includingexcept,rootStyles,remove, andignore. The empty object{}means the code is using all default values, which is perfectly valid. The default behavior (particularlyrootStyles: "move to container") aligns well with the goal of isolating Tailwind's preflight styles within the specified containers. No configuration changes are needed.package.json (1)
46-47: Dependency compatibility verified—no issues found.The addition of
tailwindcss-scoped-preflightversion^3.4.12is secure and compatible:
- No known security vulnerabilities
- Peer dependency
tailwindcss ^3is satisfied by your existing^3.3.5- Peer dependency
postcss ^8is satisfied by your existing^8.4.31
| import { | ||
| scopedPreflightStyles, | ||
| isolateInsideOfContainer, | ||
| } from 'tailwindcss-scoped-preflight'; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Mixed module syntax may cause issues.
This file mixes ES module syntax (import) with CommonJS syntax (require on lines 1, 32-33, 44). While some build tools support this, it can lead to compatibility issues or unexpected behavior.
Consider using consistent module syntax throughout the file. Apply this diff to convert to CommonJS:
-import {
- scopedPreflightStyles,
- isolateInsideOfContainer,
-} from 'tailwindcss-scoped-preflight';
+const {
+ scopedPreflightStyles,
+ isolateInsideOfContainer,
+} = require('tailwindcss-scoped-preflight');📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| import { | |
| scopedPreflightStyles, | |
| isolateInsideOfContainer, | |
| } from 'tailwindcss-scoped-preflight'; | |
| const { | |
| scopedPreflightStyles, | |
| isolateInsideOfContainer, | |
| } = require('tailwindcss-scoped-preflight'); |
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
In tailwind.config.js around lines 3 to 6 (and note existing CommonJS usage at
lines 1, 32-33, 44), the file mixes ES module import syntax with CommonJS
requires; convert the ES imports to CommonJS by replacing the import statement
with a const { scopedPreflightStyles, isolateInsideOfContainer } =
require('tailwindcss-scoped-preflight'); and ensure the rest of the file
continues to use module.exports/require consistently (or alternatively convert
all require usages to import/export if you prefer ESM), keeping a single module
system throughout.
| ], {} | ||
| ), | ||
| } ), | ||
| require('@tailwindcss/forms'), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Remove duplicate plugin registration.
The @tailwindcss/forms plugin is already registered on line 32. This duplicate registration on line 44 will cause the plugin to be loaded twice, which may lead to unexpected behavior or warnings.
Apply this diff to remove the duplicate:
scopedPreflightStyles( {
isolationStrategy: isolateInsideOfContainer(
[
'.wpuf_packs',
'#wpuf-subscription-page',
'#wpuf-form-builder',
'#wpuf-profile-forms-list-table-view'
], {}
),
} ),
- require('@tailwindcss/forms'),
],📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| require('@tailwindcss/forms'), | |
| scopedPreflightStyles( { | |
| isolationStrategy: isolateInsideOfContainer( | |
| [ | |
| '.wpuf_packs', | |
| '#wpuf-subscription-page', | |
| '#wpuf-form-builder', | |
| '#wpuf-profile-forms-list-table' | |
| ], {} | |
| ), | |
| } ), | |
| ], |
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
In tailwind.config.js around line 44, the @tailwindcss/forms plugin is
registered twice (also at line 32); remove the duplicate
require('@tailwindcss/forms') entry at line 44 so the plugin is only listed once
in the plugins array, keeping the original registration at line 32 intact.
1 participant
fixes #1735
introduced
tailwindcss-scoped-preflightpackage to scope our tailwindcss classes. It will reduce conflict with other themes/plugins cssSummary by CodeRabbit