Pooya Parsa

Adding a 3rd config source (other than `nuxt.config.` and `config/`) confuses users and prevents to directly configure nuxtjs (like adding analytics module or even setting router base or some meta)...

@Koc Exactly that's also my concern/preference to use separate projects. But I know monolith projects that may benefit from this feature to structure their project better. Also, we have the...

@clarkdo I see your point about route conflicts. that's also mentioned in the notes to be supported About mono-repo yes that's one solution for separating admin/cms I personally use (and...

@pm-LTK This does not affect the user's performance at all. All sub-apps are finally merged into the same data structure. We just glob multiple directories. I also thought about the...

@MarioC3 Yes! Part of POC is in [nuxt-extend](https://github.com/nuxt-community/nuxt-extend) which needs to be ported to nuxt kit + some refactors on nuxt3 core to fulfill requirements.

Nice idea about config overriding/preset @wagerfield. But config handling is out of module scope. The order of a nuxt project bootstrap is: 1.CLI > 2.Read Config > 3.Normalize Options >...

@wagerfield Nice write-up. Thanks. I appreciate it. Points I can extract from it as TODO for RFC: - Meta-definition should be more mature. Maybe we can explicitly define module dependencies...

For now you can keep using 0.2.x or use `ssr: false` We are working on a better solution for integration with vite ssr that hopefully solving this issue.

Hi sorry i missed this issue. PR welcome for docs until supporting styleResources. But supporting it shouldn't be also hard. We have to merge `options.styleResources` and `options.build.stylesResources` and pass to...

Should be solved on 0.3.3