Support for Bulma v0.6.0

[MannikJ]

Hi,

It would be really nice if someone could adjust the package to be compatible with the new version of Bulma.
The changes shouldn't be too complicated, but at the moment I'm not able to do it myself.

Ok, I just saw there is already an open pull request, that fixes this issue! Would be great if tt would be merged in the near future.

Best regards,
Jannik

[FyiurAmron]

are you talking about this issue: #13 solved by this PR: #12 ? If so, your report is a clear duplicate.

Also, FWIW, it's Bulma 0.6.0, not 6.0.

[BarryPooter]

Seems to still not work after running npm install --save vue-bulma-tooltip@latest. I'm getting the same error even though I'm on the latest version (1.0.4).

Same counts for the other vue-bulma components.

[FyiurAmron]

@KakaCarrotCake have you checked the status of #12 ? If you did, you'd probably realize that it still haven't been merged. If you want to fix the error, merge the changes into your node_modules by hand. Also, FWIW, other vue-bulma components have separate maintainers and trackers. You won't get any support for them here.

[BarryPooter]

@FyiurAmron Ah I see, I saw that the changes were accepted so I thought they were supposed to be pushed, I'm not too active on github issues so I didn't know; thanks for clarifying that.

[MannikJ]

@KakaCarrotCake My issue was just about merging the PR. I am already using the fix fork.
To be honest I only realized the open PR after creating the issue, so sorry. But I am wondering why it is still open.
Version 6.0 was obviously the wrong number. I changed the title, but may also close it completely if you think it is unnecessary

[FyiurAmron]

@MannikJ frankly, it's probably because the vue-bulma components are maintained for free by a bunch of volunteers, so any real support for them is nearly nonexistent even in the simplest cases (the so-called "fork yourself" philosophy). Not much can be done about it, apart from using those aforementioned forks (or your very own ones) instead of the root vue-bulma repo.

Still, yes, if it's about #13 & #12 , then this issue is a clear duplicate and should be closed.