Closed twrichards closed 4 years ago
I'm not comfortable enough with sbt to say whether this is an improvement, I've always found the semantics of it to be completely unintelligible. Also, I've had serious problems with the composer test suite not running properly locally because docker is in an inconsistent state.
I'm not comfortable enough with sbt to say whether this is an improvement, I've always found the semantics of it to be completely unintelligible. Also, I've had serious problems with the composer test suite not running properly locally because docker is in an inconsistent state.
How do you feel if I restore the the script and add it back to the README, so we have the choice?
Did this as part of https://trello.com/c/dGQVgKRl/293-introduce-an-integration-test-harness-for-path-manager-endpoints-prior-to-refactoring but not actually necessary for that ticket.
What does this change?
A relatively small change to essentially move the logic of the
start.sh
script intosbt start
, using https://github.com/ehsanyou/sbt-docker-compose. This might be against convention so happy to close it if people prefer it in a script, but I felt this was nicer and makes debugging in IntelliJ dead easy.How to test
Check out the branch and run
sbt start
you should then be able to use https://pathmanager.local.dev-gutools.co.uk as before.How can we measure success?
DevX hopefully improved slightly - might just be me.
Have we considered potential risks?
This is a local development thing so minimal/no risk.
Images
N/A