Open PeterJCLaw opened 5 years ago
Thanks for the review. I'm actually tempted to hold off merging this for the moment as it's semi-breaking -- if I were to start using this and add a README, then users of older versions would get broken.
(Reviving due to discussion in https://github.com/srobo/inventory/pull/10)
This is definitely a breaking change, but it's quite an important one. I'm not sure how we go about rolling this out in a clean way, so it might be best to just ship it and ask people to update. What do the failures look like for older clients, outside of inv-validate
erroring?
I know that Rich has expressed in the past a desire to extract the inventory tools from the sr.tools, which I had ben pondering as a good time to introduce a breaking change.
I'm not actually sure if that's a good idea and I had been considering ways to do it which made one or other (or both) parts library-like such that they could still interoperate.
I can't recall what the failure modes are for older cilents when we add a README file, however I doubt that they're helpful. I did consider adding something which would improve the error message, however that becomes a bit chicken & egg (other, perhaps, than in the breakout scenario described above).
I know that Rich has expressed in the past a desire to extract the inventory tools from the sr.tools, which I had ben pondering as a good time to introduce a breaking change.
I think that extracting the inventory tools from sr.tools
is a good idea. The vast majority of volunteers do not use any other functionality.
I'm not actually sure if that's a good idea and I had been considering ways to do it which made one or other (or both) parts library-like such that they could still interoperate.
Sure.
I can't recall what the failure modes are for older cilents when we add a README file, however I doubt that they're helpful. I did consider adding something which would improve the error message, however that becomes a bit chicken & egg (other, perhaps, than in the breakout scenario described above).
I'd encourage increasing the major version number for this change.
Hi @PeterJCLaw, what are the next steps to get this moved forward?
Perhaps we could update the tool, wait a period for volunteers to update (say 6 months, with comms?) and then add a README to the inventory repo?
Hi @PeterJCLaw, what are the next steps to get this moved forward?
Perhaps we could update the tool, wait a period for volunteers to update (say 6 months, with comms?) and then add a README to the inventory repo?
Yeah, something like that. Or we could revisit the idea of extracting the inventory tooling.
But only within plain directories. This avoids potential confusion between whether to look in an 'info' file or a 'README.md' file by ensuring that only one of them is valid in a given location.
Fixes https://github.com/srobo/tools/issues/17.
This is based on #22; see https://github.com/srobo/tools/commit/5b3da23e4a2cc22b230ca34a62b792ad09cea027 for the actually interesting change here.