Accepted rfcs/accepted/rfc-patties-ui-migrate.md

patties migrate (rtl, radix) — codemods for user-authored UI code

Accept, scoped to user-authored code. First-party stamped components already use

Review verdict (2026-05-28)

Accept, scoped to user-authored code. First-party stamped components already use the unified radix-ui import and logical CSS props, so a migration over unmodified catalog source is a no-op. The value is for user-written or imported code adopting patties-ui conventions.

Scope pins:

  • radix: scattered @radix-ui/react-* imports → unified radix-ui namespace import. Uses Bun's transpiler/AST tooling — no Babel/jscodeshift dep (bun-native rule).
  • rtl: physical → logical CSS/Tailwind props (ml-*→ms-*, text-left→ text-start, etc.); pairs with the direction provider ([[ui/22-direction]]).
  • Refuses to run on a dirty tree without --force; --dry-run recommended first.
  • Ambiguous sites reported for manual review, never silently mis-rewritten.

Encoded into cli/17-migrate-codemods.

Summary

Two codemods — radix (unify Radix imports) and rtl (physical→logical CSS props) — for migrating user-authored/imported components onto patties-ui conventions.

Motivation

shadcn ships these codemods. patties has none. They're mostly moot for first-party source (already compliant) but useful for code users bring from old shadcn projects.

Proposal

patties migrate <radix|rtl> [glob] [--dry-run] [--force], default glob = config.ui.componentsDir. Idempotent; per-file before/after summary.

Trade-offs

  • Codemods can mis-rewrite dynamic class construction; mitigated by reporting (not guessing) ambiguous sites and requiring a clean tree.

Open questions

  • Is a combined patties migrate all worth it? (Out of scope for v1.)