Skip to content

Upgrade to React 19, Tailwind 4, and new shadcn baseline#91

Merged
tjcouch-sil merged 3 commits into
mainfrom
upgrade-shadcn
May 12, 2026
Merged

Upgrade to React 19, Tailwind 4, and new shadcn baseline#91
tjcouch-sil merged 3 commits into
mainfrom
upgrade-shadcn

Conversation

@tjcouch-sil

@tjcouch-sil tjcouch-sil commented May 5, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Propagate changes from paranext-core upgrade-shadcn branch:

  • Update package.json deps (React 19, TW4, @tailwindcss/postcss, @dreamsicle.io/stylelint-config-tailwindcss, tw-animate-css, lucide-react@1.8, eslint-plugin-react-hooks@5)
  • Slim tailwind.config.ts (TW4 moves theme/colors/etc into CSS)
  • postcss.config.ts uses @tailwindcss/postcss
  • .stylelintrc.cjs uses @Dreamsicle config and ignores new TW4 at-rules
  • web-view-resolve-webpack-plugin.ts: bind resolver.join to resolver
  • README.md: tw- prefix examples updated to tw:

This change is Reviewable

Propagate changes from paranext-core upgrade-shadcn branch:
- Update package.json deps (React 19, TW4, @tailwindcss/postcss,
  @dreamsicle.io/stylelint-config-tailwindcss, tw-animate-css,
  lucide-react@1.8, eslint-plugin-react-hooks@5)
- Slim tailwind.config.ts (TW4 moves theme/colors/etc into CSS)
- postcss.config.ts uses @tailwindcss/postcss
- .stylelintrc.cjs uses @Dreamsicle config and ignores new TW4 at-rules
- web-view-resolve-webpack-plugin.ts: bind resolver.join to resolver
- README.md: tw- prefix examples updated to tw:

Co-Authored-By: Claude Code <noreply@anthropic.com>

@irahopkinson irahopkinson left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

One thing to check.

@irahopkinson reviewed 8 files and all commit messages, and made 2 comments.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on lyonsil and tjcouch-sil).


package-lock.json line 0 at r1 (raw file):
BTW the first commit looks like it changed this file correctly but the second commit seems to be reverting some of those changes. Is that what we want? My guess is you didn't have the changes in core when you made this change here, e.g. you might not have been on your PR #2207 branch.

@irahopkinson irahopkinson left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

:lgtm:

@irahopkinson reviewed 1 file and all commit messages, and made 1 comment.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on lyonsil and tjcouch-sil).

@irahopkinson irahopkinson left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@irahopkinson resolved 1 discussion.
Reviewable status: :shipit: complete! all files reviewed, all discussions resolved (waiting on lyonsil).

@tjcouch-sil tjcouch-sil merged commit 325b256 into main May 12, 2026
5 checks passed
@tjcouch-sil tjcouch-sil deleted the upgrade-shadcn branch May 12, 2026 23:32
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants