search

neovim / packspec

ALPHA package dependencies spec
http://packspec.org/
Apache License 2.0
219 stars 2 forks source link

Non rockspec compatible proposal #2

Closed mjlbach closed 2 years ago

mjlbach commented 2 years ago

cc @wbthomason @ii14

wbthomason commented 2 years ago

Noting that my review comments from #1 are applicable to this version also (i.e. thoughts on source field, possible dependencies schema, and preference for keys over strings for dependency versions)

mjlbach commented 2 years ago

preference for keys over strings for dependency versions

I thought that my changes reflected this?

wbthomason commented 2 years ago

preference for keys over strings for dependency versions

I thought that my changes reflected this?

Ah yep, sorry.

lewis6991 commented 2 years ago

The fact that we need to deviate from rockspec anyway leads me to preferring this over #1.

With that said, let's remain mindful of rockspec (and other formats), and make sure we don't invent too much.

I'm in favour of submitting this PR as is and opening focused issues on specific points.

mjlbach commented 2 years ago

Ok, I am submitting v1 but we can open specific issues on these points then.