Proposal: Use arrify to support both array and object rules

[blakeembrey]

I normally prefer to use multiple instances of plugins where I need them, not multiple rules upfront. You can easily abstract this though, by accepting both.

[dpobel]

Hi @blakeembrey

you mean being able to write:

metalsmith
.use(fileMetadata(
    {pattern: "posts/*", metadata: {"section": "blogs", "type": "post"}}
))
.use(fileMetadata(
    {pattern: "pages/*", metadata: {"section": "content", "type": "page"}}
));

instead of

metalsmith.use(fileMetadata([
    {pattern: "posts/*", metadata: {"section": "blogs", "type": "post"}},
    {pattern: "pages/*", metadata: {"section": "content", "type": "page"}}
]));

?

Well, you can already write:

metalsmith
.use(fileMetadata([
    {pattern: "posts/*", metadata: {"section": "blogs", "type": "post"}}
]))
.use(fileMetadata([
    {pattern: "pages/*", metadata: {"section": "content", "type": "page"}}
]));

if you really want to separate the rules/calls.

That said, the patch would be trivial to also support a unique rule as fileMetadata parameter, so feel free to submit a pull request, I'll merge it as long as the change is documented and unit tested :)