content(homepage) Mention 0CJS capability

[EugeneHlushko]

As mentioned on #1870 homepage doesnt say that webpack can compile without config

• Mention on the homepage about 0cjs capability

P.S. im not really sure we should make the examples more complicated to match our 0cjs setup, maybe just mention it in other way?

P.P.S Should i add mode: "production" to the config snippet?

[EugeneHlushko]

CC @TheLarkInn would be nice to get your view on this Sean

[EugeneHlushko]

[montogeek]

That small change is fine but it doesn't feel to sell 0C well enough.
Also, defaults are src/index.js no src/app.js, so in the case the user just run webpack without any config file an error would appear saying that src/index.js can not be resolved.

Changing it to src/index.js would be better, it is also the name file of the getting starting page.

[EugeneHlushko]

Yes indeed it should be index.js, changed thank you @montogeek
In regard to selling 0cjs thats why i pinged Sean, i think he does this best :)

[dhruvdutt]

Can we clean __ from __Without config__?
I think we only use them with file names.

[EugeneHlushko]

It is for giving a strong emphasis on 0cjs, we need @TheLarkInn to have a look at this

[dhruvdutt]

Sure! We should give emphasis on 0CJS. Not sure if __ is the best way to do it.

[EugeneHlushko]

@montogeek can you assign a review request on @TheLarkInn pls he doesnt seem to get notifications on comment level

[EugeneHlushko]

@sokra can you pls advice on wording here as Sean seems not responsive for last two weeks

[TheLarkInn]

Sorry I've been digging out of my inbox. Okay so I guess you could link it to my talk from JSCONF Iceland which talks about 0CJS!

[TheLarkInn]

https://youtu.be/3Nv9muOkb6k I believe holds the marker to it. We could make a custom expert about it if we needed to.

[EugeneHlushko]

hmm ive seen that talk, its good 👍 do you mean linking this specific phrase? Without config @TheLarkInn

[dhruvdutt]

@TheLarkInn Here's precisely where we talk about 0CJS. https://youtu.be/3Nv9muOkb6k?t=21293

[EugeneHlushko]

Rebased it all, it now contains a link to specific time (thx @dhruvdutt and @TheLarkInn)

[jeremenichelli]

Can we merge this if all issues were addressed?

[EugeneHlushko]

Some PRs hanging approved for a while, are you trying to merge things one day in the end of the month @montogeek ?

[montogeek]

@EugeneHlushko I wait for more input from other contributors :)

[montogeek]

Thanks!

[EugeneHlushko]

Ah got it, maybe makes sense to assign people on approved PRs so they dont get rebased/updated so often due to becoming outdated vs target branch, a good example is #1948