search

starbelly / rebar_mix

rebar3 plugin for building Elixir dependencies with mix
Apache License 2.0
0 stars 0 forks source link

State rebar3 compatibility in README #12

Open paulo-ferraz-oliveira opened 1 year ago

paulo-ferraz-oliveira commented 1 year ago

The README should state rebar3 compatibility. I'd aim for the last 3 versions, as is common with e.g. rebar3 vs Erlang/OTP; and keep that updated in CI.

Does rebar3 even have a way to check this for plugins? If not we could open an issue there, if it's an interesting feature to have.

@starbelly, while this is not yet released I'd rename it rebar3_mix, also. 😄

starbelly commented 1 year ago

The README should state rebar3 compatibility. I'd aim for the last 3 versions, as is common with e.g. rebar3 vs Erlang/OTP; and keep that updated in CI.

Fully agreed.

Does rebar3 even have a way to check this for plugins? If not we could open an issue there, if it's an interesting feature to have.

I do not believe so, but yes sounds useful 👍

@paulo-ferraz-oliveira Renaming it I have no strong opinions on (this would constitute an entirely new package on hex though). The only reason why it might be advantegous to keep the original name is at some point maybe, and AFAIK, rebar is to end up in OTP. When / if that happens rebar3 will be rebar again :)

starbelly commented 1 year ago

Related : I'm not sure this will stay under my name, maybe it's best to put this under erlef, not sure, but didn't want it to block progress either, so just put it under here. Regardless of where the git repo lives, there needs to be multiple admins, otherwise this can end up in a funky transfer ownership situation.

paulo-ferraz-oliveira commented 1 year ago

rebar is to end up in OTP. When / if that happens rebar3 will be rebar again :)

Did not consider this or the former (that someone would take over the Hex package). Makes sense, so I reverse the proposal to change the name 👍

paulo-ferraz-oliveira commented 1 year ago

Ownership => jelly-beam, maybe, for the time being?

paulo-ferraz-oliveira commented 1 year ago

As for the rebar3 option, I raised this with @ferd and he made a good point of it not being an optimal choice. So maybe the plugin just needs to check for stuff at runtime, maybe?

e.g. I'm using rebar3 3.18 to develop, but you're using 3.20 to compile it locally. We're not checking for the same stuff, so it could break anyway :)

paulo-ferraz-oliveira commented 1 year ago

A mention in the README, at least, gives consumers some "guarantees"...

paulo-ferraz-oliveira commented 4 days ago

@starbelly, with the discussion around this type of interop, I got lost in if this is moving forward? Otherwise feel free to close the issue...