Closed Arc8ne closed 8 months ago
Hey, thanks for the feature request. Yes I can indeed add this option shouldn't be a problem.
Just wondering is this a duplicate of https://github.com/ayecue/greybel-js/issues/177 since the description sounds pretty similar or is there any difference?
Hey, thanks for the feature request. Yes I can indeed add this option shouldn't be a problem.
Just wondering is this a duplicate of #177 since the description sounds pretty similar or is there any difference?
Hi there, thank you and thanks for the response.
With regards to your question, in theory, this issue and #177 are not duplicates of one another. However, if this issue is resolved, then #177 would pretty much no longer be an issue.
In order to keep backwards compatibility I've decided instead to introduce a option called --disable-build-folder
. By using that option it will put the output directly into the destination folder without wrapping it into a build folder. It will be part of 3.2.16
.
In order to keep backwards compatibility I've decided instead to introduce a option called
--disable-build-folder
. By using that option it will put the output directly into the destination folder without wrapping it into a build folder. It will be part of3.2.16
.
I see, thanks.
Should be available now with 3.2.16
released.
I see, thank you.
Since this issue has been resolved in 3.2.16
, I will close it.
Thanks again for helping to resolve the issue.
While using this tool, I have noticed that when building the files, the result (i.e. resulting files) of the build are outputted into a folder called "build" which is then stored in the output folder located at the path specified by the
output
argument.As a result, I was wondering if the behavior of this tool could be updated such that the result (i.e. resulting files) of the build would be directly outputted into the output folder located at the path specified by the
output
argument?If necessary, I can provide further elaborations and details regarding this feature request.